Dayka & Hackett, LLC v. Del Monte Fresh Produce N.A., Inc., 228 Ariz. 533 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012)

(defendant claimed that its security interest in debtor’s 2008 table grape crop was superior to plaintiff’s security interest in same crop; in 2007, plaintiff agreed to finance debtor’s 2007 grape crop to be grown in Mexico and took a security interest debtor’s 2007 grape crop and all future crops and proceeds thereof; plaintiff filed financing statement on 1/18/07 in Washington, D.C. pursuant to A.R.S. Sec. 47-9307(C) because Mexico had no filing or registration system at the time; state (AZ) law said that local law where debtor located governs perfection if debtor located in jurisdiction where local law requires information concerning existence of non-possessory security interest to be made in a public filing, recording or registration system as a condition of obtaining priority over a lien creditor; if no such system in place in debtor’s jurisdiction, creditor to file financing statement in Washington, D.C.; defendant advanced funds to debtor to grow 2008 grape crop after searching public registry in Sonora Mexico; under agreement with debtor, under marketing agreements, defendant obligated to market and sell crop that debtor was financing; debtor granted defendant security interest in 2008 crop and proceeds thereof; in May of 2008, defendant marketed debtor’s 2008 crop and collected and retained sale proceeds after plaintiff notified defendant in April of its security interest; plaintiff sued to enforce its security interest in the 2008 crop; amendments to Mexico law in 2009 created a federal registry for recording security interests; court determined that Mexico law did not satisfy requirements of AZ law in 2007 and 2008 and that filing was properly in Washington, D.C.; defendant liable for conversion because plaintiff had right to sales proceeds and was entitled to immediate possession; plaintiff granted attorney fees).