ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Madisonville Recapping Co. (1990)

ITT Commercial Finance v. Madisonville Recapping (1990)

The Kentucky Court of Appeals, Howard, J., decided this appeal on August 3, 1990. Full CAP opinion and disposition were retrieved from the primary opinion text at the front-matter URL.

Source note (2026-10-18):

• Links on this page to https://static.case.law/sw2d/793/cases/0849-01.json are an (unofficial Caselaw Access Project copy, retrieved before 2026-10-18; host disallows automated access); no official or otherwise permitted full-text copy was located on 2026-10-18.

Facts

Two businesses repaired a mining loader at the owner’s Webster County mine, without possessing it. The corporate owner’s registered office was in Jefferson County. Madisonville Recapping filed its equipment lien in Webster County. ITT asserted a purchase-money security interest and apparently repossessed and sold the loader; the record did not detail that sale. The commissioner and trial court gave the repair liens priority without deciding whether ITT proved a perfected interest.

Complete holdings and disposition

1. For KRS 376.440, the corporate owner’s residence was its registered-office county. Jefferson, rather than Webster, was the proper filing county; Madisonville Recapping had not perfected its lien. The court did not retroactively apply the later UCC corporate-residence amendment, but independently adopted the registered-office construction for the equipment-lien statute.
2. Former KRS 355.9-310 required possession for priority over a perfected security interest. On-site work on large equipment did not justify ignoring that language. corbin-deposit-bank-v-king-1964 involved a repairer in possession until court-ordered removal and did not decide this issue.
3. ITT still had to prove its claimed perfected interest. The record had no finding/evidence resolving that issue; the court did not simply enter a final priority judgment for ITT.

The judgment was reversed and remanded, all judges concurring. See 793 S.W.2d at 850–52.

Current treatment and limits

Current KRS 376.440 still distinguishes resident-owner filing from nonresident equipment-location filing. Current KRS 355.9-333 defines possessory priority, excluding agricultural liens and consensual security interests from that definition. Attachment of a nonpossessory repair lien therefore must not be conflated with possessory superpriority. Primary texts retrieved: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=35334 and https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=33786 .

Full-holding verification and statutory comparison are complete for these points. Targeted treatment is not a comprehensive good-law certificate, and this case does not adjudicate the validity or title effect of every later equipment sale.

Applies in →

kentucky · equipment-and-machinery · ucc-article-9-dispositions

Legal information, not legal advice. Verify primary sources and current law before acting.