ORS 79.0304¹
UCC 9-304. Law governing perfection and priority of security interests in deposit accounts

(1) The local law of a bank’s jurisdiction governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection and the priority of a security interest in a deposit account maintained with that bank.

(2) The following rules determine a bank’s jurisdiction for purposes of ORS 79.0301 (UCC 9-301. Law governing perfection and priority of security interests) to 79.0342 (UCC 9-342. Bank's right to refuse to enter into or disclose existence of control agreement):

(a) If an agreement between the bank and the debtor governing the deposit account expressly provides that a particular jurisdiction is the bank’s jurisdiction for purposes of ORS 79.0301 (UCC 9-301. Law governing perfection and priority of security interests) to 79.0342 (UCC 9-342. Bank's right to refuse to enter into or disclose existence of control agreement), this chapter or the Uniform Commercial Code, that jurisdiction is the bank’s jurisdiction.

(b) If paragraph (a) of this subsection does not apply and an agreement between the bank and its customer governing the deposit account expressly provides that the agreement is governed by the law of a particular jurisdiction, that jurisdiction is the bank’s jurisdiction.

(c) If neither paragraph (a) nor paragraph (b) of this subsection applies and an agreement between the bank and its customer governing the deposit account expressly provides that the deposit account is maintained at an office in a particular jurisdiction, that jurisdiction is the bank’s jurisdiction.

(d) If paragraphs (a) to (c) of this subsection do not apply, the bank’s jurisdiction is the jurisdiction in which the office identified in an account statement as the office serving the customer’s account is located.

(e) If paragraphs (a) to (d) of this subsection do not apply, the bank’s jurisdiction is the jurisdiction in which the chief executive office of the bank is located. [2001 c.445 §24]

Chapter 79

Note

Subject sec­tions all sub­se­quently renumbered or repealed

Notes of Decisions

The require­ments of this chapter necessary to grant the peti­tioner a security interest in the first net proceeds were satisfied. Great W. Nat. Bank v. Hill, 27 Or App 893, 557 P2d 1367 (1976), Sup Ct review denied

This chapter applies to the assign­ment of proceeds of a pending lawsuit. Great W. Nat. Bank v. Hill, 27 Or App 893, 557 P2d 1367 (1976), Sup Ct review denied

Where lease instru­ment covering farm tractor re­quired lessee to be responsible for taxes and insurance, to bear risk of loss and excluded warranties of fitness and merchantability; at end of lease period fair market wholesale value of tractor would be substantially less than actual estimated value; and common practice was for lessees to purchase tractors for anticipated fair market wholesale value, instru­ment was security agree­ment governed by this chapter. Appleway Leasing Inc., v. Wilken, 39 Or App 43, 591 P2d 382 (1979)

Clear and unequivocal ac­tions manifesting party's intent to waive may be proved by parol and circumstantial evidence as well as by direct testimony. Bank of Eastern Oregon v. Griffith, 101 Or App 528, 792 P2d 1210 (1990)

Law Review Cita­tions

12 WLJ 207-264 (1976); 16 WLR 755 (1980); 75 OLR 493 (1996)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 79—Secured Transactions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­Archive/­2007ors79.­pdf (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 79, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­079ano.­htm (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent. Currency Information