Corporate and Business Blog

Down on the Farm – Taking a Security Interest in Motor Vehicles

Thursday, March 24th, 2011

When making an agricultural loan, questions often arise about how to properly take a security interest in collateral typically associated with such a loan.  Commonly, questions arise when taking a security interest in motor vehicles owned by a farmer. 

Indiana’s motor vehicle code draws a distinction between “motor vehicles” on the one hand, and “farm tractors,” “farm trucks, farm trailers, or farm semitrailers and tractors,” “farm vehicles loaded with a farm product,” and “farm wagons” on the other.  A “motor vehicle” is one which is self-propelled upon a highway, excluding farm tractors and farm implements designed to be primarily operated in a farm field or farm premises, among other things.  A “motor vehicle” is subject to a certificate of title issued by the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles. 

In order to take a security interest in a motor vehicle, the secured party must include a specific description of the motor vehicle in the security agreement, and the secured party’s lien should be noted on the certificate of title and the certificate of title is then held by the secured party.  Where a vehicle is required to be registered (as opposed to titled), the item should be specifically listed on the security agreement and a financing statement should be filed.  Included among these vehicles are farm implements, farm tractors, and certain other types of farm machinery.

Author: Laura A. Scott (bio)
Phone: 812.452.3557
email: lscott@bamberger.com

But we don’t have any unclaimed property!

Friday, March 18th, 2011

That was the exclamation at many of the 3,500 Indiana businesses that recently received a notice of penalty from the Unclaimed Property Division of the Indiana Attorney General’s Office. These letters stated that “lack of response and participation in the Amnesty program has resulted in a late payment fine of $100 per day up to a maximum of $5,000…” These letters came as a surprise to Indiana businesses that do not hold any unclaimed property.

Indiana Code section 32-34-1-29 states that “A holder of property that is presumed abandoned…shall report in writing to the attorney general concerning the property.”  The statute does not state that a business that is not a holder of unclaimed property must also report.  Additionally, the Attorney General’s website states that “”Negative” or “Zero” annual reports reflecting that no unclaimed property is held by the holder or business enterprise are not statutorily required.” 

A number of groups are currently working with the Attorney General’s office to resolve what seems to be a possible discrepancy between the statute and enforcement activity. We will keep you updated as we receive any additional information.  In the meantime, if you received this notice, please consider contacting your legal counsel before paying the penalty.  A few minutes with your advisor might save you some money.

Author: Lori Young (bio)
Phone: 812.452.3560
Email: lyoung@bamberger.com

Multiple Guarantors of a Single Debt

Tuesday, March 8th, 2011

Virtually all business is transacted these days in some form of limited liability entity, such as a corporation or LLC.  One of the primary purposes of these entities is to shield the owners of the entity from personal liability for the debts and obligations of the entity.  This is particularly useful in the event of business failure or when all of the trade accounts cannot be paid, or in the event of a catastrophic, uninsured personal injury loss or the like.  However, as anyone who has tried to do otherwise has learned, the banks providing the financing for these entities (except in very rare circumstances) require personal guaranties from the owners so that they do become personally liable for the bank debt in the event that the entity cannot pay.  (more…)

Corporate Meetings by Conference Call or Skype

Friday, February 25th, 2011

Through the years the Indiana law on corporations has actually been a leader in innovation in many respects.  One area in which Indiana took a leading role was to respond to changes in technology with respect to conducting corporate meetings.  The historic requirement that shareholders, in person or by proxy, gather together in a single room to conduct a meeting, or that the Board of Directors had to gather together at one place to conduct business, was long ago replaced in Indiana by a provision allowing telephone (and now Skype or other such devices) to be the vehicle for meeting.  So long as everyone involved in the meeting can hear each other at all times during the meeting, it is possible to have these meetings with various participants in remote locations.  (more…)

Bamberger Seminar – A Practical Approach to Managing Environmental Issues in Manufacturing

Monday, February 21st, 2011

Join the attorneys at Bamberger on March 16, 2011 from 7:30 to 9:00 am for a complimentary seminar covering environmental issues facing manufacturers and other businesses today. (more…)

When is a Landlord Liable to a Nearby Property Owner for a Nuisance Caused by its Tenant?

Thursday, February 10th, 2011

When environmental contamination from a property migrates off-site, it is common to bring the owner of that property (and all the insurance companies) to the table to pay for the environmental defense, damages and cleanup costs of the impacted neighbors.  (more…)

50/50 Ownership Short Circuits a Lawsuit

Tuesday, February 8th, 2011

In a recently reported opinion, the Indiana Court of Appeals faced a situation where there were two 50% owners of an LLC.  This LLC was member managed and did not have managers or officers.  Thus, the actual owners made the decisions.  (more…)

Did They Think This Through?

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

Clients frequently look at organizational documents such as articles of incorporation and by-laws as being “lawyer boilerplate”.  However, these documents do have enormous legal significance and deserve a good deal of client thought and planning before they are put in to place. (more…)

Beware of the Shoot-Out

Thursday, January 13th, 2011

Small business owners dream, plan, worry and work together to insure the future they share together in their businesses.  But inevitably that relationship will come to an end.  Whether it is by death of one of the owners, a falling-out or any of a number of other reasons, there will come a time when the interest held by one of the owners is going to pass to someone else.  Left unrestricted, the interest of the departing owner will continue to be held by him as an often unwilling or even antagonistic outsider, by his spouse or family who will then become totally dependent upon the remaining owners or by a competing interest to whom the former owner wishes to sell.  To protect the company, the ongoing owners and the separating owner the parties will frequently sign agreements that provide that on the separation of one of the owners, or when an owner wishes to sell his interest or at certain other times the business has a right to buy back the interest of the separating owner and/or the separating owner (or heirs as the case may be) has a right to compel the company to buy back that interest.  (more…)

Bamberger Seminar – A Practical Approach to Managing Environmental Issues in Manufacturing

Thursday, January 6th, 2011

Join the attorneys at Bamberger on February 2, 2011 from 7:30 to 9:00 am for a complimentary seminar covering environmental issues facing manufacturers and other businesses today. (more…)