· 9/14/1982
Liberty Bank v. Honolulu Providoring, Inc.
Citations
- 650 P.2d 576
- 65 Haw. 273
- 34 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 1025
- 1982 Haw. LEXIS 218
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding UCC § 9-501(3)(b) allows the parties to determine by agreement the appropriate standards of notification and commercial reasonableness
- holding UCC § 9-501(3)(b) allows the parties to determine by agreement the appropriate standards of notification and commercial reasonableness
- declining to determine if notice was reasonable under the UCC and finding that “[b]y the very terms of the note and security agreement, Liberty Bank failed to provide sufficient notice of the action within a reasonable time.”
- minority view that § 9 — 507(1) is debtor’s exclusive remedy “has been generally criticized”
- “sharp disagreement among jurisdictions as to the proper remedy”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Richardson, Lum, Nakamura, Padgett, Hayashi
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.