HERBERT R. LINICK, APPELLANT,
v.
DOROTHY LAMM, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this chattel mortgage foreclosure case, the court affirmed the lower court's decision to foreclose on a mortgaged horse, rejecting the appellant's claim that he was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. The court held that the recorded mortgage constituted constructive notice to all subsequent purchasers, including the appellant.
The appellant is not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice because the recorded chattel mortgage constituted constructive notice to all parties, including subsequent purchasers. The factual question of whether the horse was part of the mortgagor's stock in trade was properly resolved by the chancellor against the appellant, and the recorded mortgage would bind the appellant absent such a showing.
“Section 699.07, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., provides for the recordation of chattel mortgages upon livestock to be effective against bona fide purchasers or parties acquiring an interest or lien without actual knowledge of the mortgage.”
Establishes the statutory framework for chattel mortgage recordation and the constructive notice it provides.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA chattel mortgage on a horse was executed and recorded on November 25, 1959, in Dade County, Florida. The mortgagor subsequently sold the horse to th…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Stock In Trade cases and more on FLexlaw
This was an action to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a horse. The mortgage in question was executed on the 25th day of November, 1959, and was recorded in the office of the clerk of the circuit court on the same day. After answer, notice and hearing, the chancellor concluded that the mortgage was in default and ordered the sale of the chattel in satisfaction of the decree. It is from this decree that the appeal is taken.
The appellant, the alleged purchaser of the horse after recordation of appellee’s mortgage, contends that the sale of the horse to him was from a part of the mortgagor’s stock in trade, and, therefore, he is a bona fide purchaser for value without notice and entitled to priority over the chattel mortgage holder.1 We conclude that this contention is without merit.
Section 699.07, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., provides for the recordation of chattel mortgages upon livestock to be effective against bona fide purchasers or parties acquiring an interest or lien without actual knowledge of the mortgage. In this instance, there was evidence of the recordation of the mortgage, almost simultaneous with its execution, in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, the same being the county where the horse was located. Such recordation then became notice to the world, including the appellant, of the interest claimed by the appellee. It was a question of fact for the chancellor to resolve as to whether or not the alleged sale to the appellant by the mortgagor was one from stock in trade so as to exempt the appellant from the statutory constructive notice imparted by the recorded chattel mortgage. There was conflicting testimony on this question and the chancellor resolved the conflict against the appellant. We cannot say, from an examination of this record, that he was in error in so doing. There was no contention that the appellant would not have been bound by the constructive notice of the recording statute, absent a showing that the mortgaged horse was held as a part of the stock in trade of one whose business was primarily the purchase and sale of horses. See First National Bank of Brooksville v. Evans, 100 Fla. 740, 130 So. 18.
We have considered the other contention raised by appellant and find it to be without merit. Accordingly, the decree appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nell Austin v. Harden, 152 So. 2d 751 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)…he applicable recording statutes. Under Fla.Stat. § 699.07, F.S.A.1 instruments relating to livestock must be recorded in order to constitute constructive notice. A horse comes within the livestock classification. Cf. Linick v. Lamm, Fla.App. 1962, 143 So. 2d 551. Under Fla.Stat. § 698.01, F.S.A.,2 no chattel mortgage is valid as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser for value without actual notice unless appropriately recorded. We conclude that the decree under assault determined correctly that the plai…
-
Holder Distribs., Inc. v. Barr, 204 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)…ving failed to demonstrate reversible error, the decree of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed. See 6 Fla.Jur., Conditional Sales, § 57.62; Garrett & Co. v. Mercantile Natl. Bank (5th Cir. 1941), 120 F. 2d 821; Linick v. Lamm (Fla.App.1962), 143 So. 2d 551. WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Nash Miami Motors, Inc. v. Louie Bandel for the A. A. Auto Sales-Rentals, Inc., 160 Fla. 925 (Fla. 1948)
- First Nat'l Bank of Brooksville v. Evans, 100 Fla. 740 (Fla. 1930)
- Linick v. Lamm, 143 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)