X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Tawfic Al Gailani and Abdallah Adel appeal from a summary judgment on a note in favor of Riyad Bank, Houston Agency. This court previously reversed summary judgment in favor of the bank, holding that there is a fact issue as to whether the bank’s placement of Adel, Al Gailani, and Bandariyah, a subsidiary of PanAmerican Supply Company, all makers of the note, on a “black list” maintained by the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency, was commercially reasonable as required by Texas Business and Commerce Code �9.502. The court did not reach the issue as to whether the bank’s foreclosure sale of the appellants’ intangible collateral, consisting of certain accounts receivable, was commercially reasonable as required by �9.504. On appeal, the Texas Supreme Court reversed, holding that �9.502 did not apply because the bank did not attempt to collect on the accounts. Riyad Bank v. Al Gailani, 61 S.W.3d 353 (Tex. 2001). The court remanded this cause for consideration of appellants’ claim that the trial court erred in granting the bank’s summary judgment because the bank failed to prove as a matter of law that its foreclosure sale of the accounts receivable was commercially reasonable, as required by �9.504. HOLDING:Reversed and remanded. It is undisputed that the bank was required to conduct its sale of the appellants’ collateral in a commercially reasonable manner, in accordance with former �9.504. In a nonsubstantive revision, this provision now appears in �9.610(b). The parties agree that the former statute controls in this case because the foreclosure sale occurred before the effective date of the revision. In a suit brought by a secured creditor to recover a deficiency following the sale of collateral, if a creditor pleads that all conditions precedent have been performed or have occurred, it is required to prove that its disposition of the collateral was commercially reasonable only if the debtor specifically denies it in his answer. Greathouse v. Charter Nat’l Bank – Southwest, 851 S.W.2d 173 (Tex. 1992). The bank did not allege that all conditions precedent had been performed or occurred, and the appellants did not plead in their answers that the foreclosure was not conducted in a commercially reasonable manner. They did, however, in their responses to the bank’s motion for a partial summary judgment, urge that it be denied because the foreclosure sale was not conducted in a commercially reasonable manner. The court holds that the bank was required to prove that it conducted the sale of the accounts receivable in a commercially reasonable manner. Whether collateral has been disposed of in a commercially reasonable manner is generally a question of fact. Gordon & Assoc. v. Cullen Bank Citywest, N. A., 880 S.W.2d 93 (Tex. App. � Corpus Christi 1994, no writ). The summary judgment evidence shows that the bank mailed notice to the maker and guarantors 14 days before the public sale, longer than the 10 days required under the security agreement. It posted a copy of the notice of sale in the Harris County Courthouse and published two notices of the sale in the Houston Chronicle about ten days before the sale. The bank purchased the accounts receivable, which had a face value in excess of $2 million, at the foreclosure sale for $10. Al Gailani, one of the appellants and an experienced Saudi businessman, testified in his affidavit that no responsible bank or businessman would attempt to sell accounts or receivables owned by a Saudi company with minimal notice and posting at the Harris County Courthouse. According to Gailani, the most likely buyers for any such assets would be Saudi businesses and investors. He indicated that one can only reach that market by identifying such potential investors and providing them with notice and sufficient information to make an investment decision, as well as by advertising in newspapers and magazines that might be read by Saudi investors. The court holds that the bank has not proved as a matter of law that the sale was conducted in a commercially reasonable manner. OPINION:Per curiam.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.