From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Belmont International v. Am. Int'l Shoe Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 3, 1992
972 F.2d 1527 (9th Cir. 1992)

Opinion

No. 88-4460.

September 3, 1992.

I. Franklin Hunsaker, Thomas A. Gordon. Christopher A. Rycewicz and Randy L. Arthur, Bullivant, Houser, Bailey, Pendergrass Hoffman, Portland, Or., for plaintiff-appellant.

Lee C. Nusich, First Interstate Bank of Oregon and Jeffrey M. Batchelor, Lane Powell Spears Lubersky, Portland, Or., for defendant-appellee.

Before: BROWNING, ALARCON and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.


ORDER

The Oregon Supreme Court has answered the certified questions we posed to it. Belmont Int'l v. American Int'l Shoe, 313 Or. 112, 831 P.2d 15 (1992). The court held that Belmont can make out a claim for money had and received provided it "shows that Bank had no security interest" in the disputed funds. Id. 831 P.2d at 22. A security interest will not arise in funds that Belmont can show were deposited after the Bank had "actual knowledge of the consignment relationship." Id. at 19.

Accordingly, we reverse the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's complaint and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with the Oregon Supreme Court's opinion.


Summaries of

Belmont International v. Am. Int'l Shoe Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 3, 1992
972 F.2d 1527 (9th Cir. 1992)
Case details for

Belmont International v. Am. Int'l Shoe Co.

Case Details

Full title:BELMONT INTERNATIONAL, INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Sep 3, 1992

Citations

972 F.2d 1527 (9th Cir. 1992)

Citing Cases

In re Hope

Some courts have found that this subsection is satisfied if the consignor shows that the secured creditor,…