a) What kind of goods was the mobile home?
b) Why?
c) What kind of a security interest did the bank have?
d) So what?
e) Therefore, Oak Hill won the dispute between creditors-right?
f) Oak Hill assumed that because it had a PMSI in consumer goods, its security interest perfected automatically. Oak Hill read the textbook too quickly. What section did the bank miss?
g) What is the special rule concerning these items?
h) Why does the rule make sense?
i) What was the outcome of the Oak Hill case?
j) Give an example of a security interest in consumer goods that would perfect automatically?