Whether you are an attorney, paralegal, or professional staff member, Goldberg Kohn strives to develop a vibrant culture where people of all backgrounds can grow and succeed.

Careers

Clients

Case Studies

About Us

Pages

This is a simple hero unit, a simple jumbotron-style component for calling extra attention to featured content or information.

People

News

Services

Staff

Testimonials

With our knowledge and commitment to your goals, Goldberg Kohn is built to satisfy the world’s highest standards, yours.

Home - Goldberg Kohn Ltd.

<strong><a href="https://www.goldbergkohn.com/people/randall-klein/">Randall Klein</a></strong> and <strong><a href="https://www.goldbergkohn.com/people/eva-gadzheva/">Eva Gadzheva</a></strong> have co-authored SFNet's Opposition to Permanent Editorial Board Commentary – "Injunction Against a Noncomplying Disposition Under Section 9-610."

core/paragraph

Section 9-625(a) of the Uniform Commercial Code allows courts to enjoin the disposition of collateral on appropriate terms and conditions where the secured party has not complied with the UCC. That section, however, does not establish any principles that courts should follow in determining whether an injunction is an appropriate remedy. Section 1-103(b) of the UCC provides that, unless displaced, the provisions of the UCC are supplemented by principles of law and equity.

core/pullquote

On September 8, 2021, the Permanent Editorial Board for the Uniform Commercial Code (the "PEB") released for review and comment a proposed revision to Official Comment 2 to Section 9-625. The PEB's commentary asserts that courts often reject requests to enjoin dispositions of collateral where the secured party has not complied with the UCC based solely on application of state equitable principles limiting relief when the aggrieved party has a collectable money damages remedy. The PEB argues that this approach is inconsistent with Section 9-625(a) and that, notwithstanding Section 1-103(b), the court retains the discretion to issues injunction even in cases where money damages are available.

SFNet has submitted <a href="https://www.sfnet.com/docs/default-source/tsl-tslexpress/sfnet-response-to-pebs-commentary.pdf?sfvrsn=5b4afdd3_2" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">its response in opposition to the PEB's commentary</a>, arguing that PEB's interpretation and proposed expansion of Section 9-625(a) is inconsistent with the terms, structure and purpose of the UCC and, if implemented, could lead to negative consequences for commercial lending.

News

Related People