Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Davis, BORG-WARNER

• Citation: 804 F.2d 1580
• Decision Date: 04 December 1986
• Docket Number: No. 86-8212,BORG-WARNER,86-8212
• Parties: ACCEPTANCE CORP., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. Welborn DAVIS, Board of Commissioners of Washington County, Janie L. Bryan, Dwayne McDonald, United States of America, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)

Page 1580

804 F.2d 1580

BORG-WARNER ACCEPTANCE CORP., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. Welborn DAVIS, Board of Commissioners of Washington

County, Janie L. Bryan, Dwayne McDonald, United

States of America, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 86-8212.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Dec. 4, 1986.

Glenn A. Delk, Patricia H. Blumberg, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant.

Frank L. Butler, III, Macon, Ga., for United States of America.

Hubert C. Lovein, Jr., Macon, Ga., for Bryan & Bd. of Comrs.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia.

Before HILL and FAY, Circuit Judges, and MORGAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

In this contract dispute, we review the district court's orders granting summary judgment against appellant, Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. ("BWAC"). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

BACKGROUND

BWAC, an Illinois corporation, is engaged in the business of financing the sale of farm equipment. On May 5, 1980, BWAC entered into a Retail Finance Agreement with defendant C. Welborn Davis ("Davis") wherein BWAC agreed to finance the sale of equipment by Davis. On July 17, 1980, Davis as sole proprietor of Davis Tractor Co., sold some items of farm equipment to defendant Dwayne McDonald ("McDonald"), which was financed under the terms of a Retail Installment Contract. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this contract the "[b]uyer acknowledges that Seller is not the Borg-Warner Acceptance Corporation agent for receipt of payments ... and Buyer bears all responsibility for payments reaching [BWAC]."

McDonald granted a security interest in the farm equipment to Davis which was subsequently assigned to BWAC. BWAC perfected its security interest in the equipment on July 30, 1980, by filing a financing statement with the Clerk of the Superior Court of Washington County, Georgia. Defendant Janie L. Bryan ("Bryan") is the Clerk of that court.

On February 11, 1981, the United States, through the Farmers Home Administration ("FmHA"), advanced $74,560.00 to McDonald and his wife in the form of a loan to refinance the farm equipment purchased from Davis. The loan funds were deposited at defendant George D. Warthen Bank in a supervised account. McDonald entered into a security agreement with the FmHA covering the farm equipment. On February 12, 1981, a financing statement was filed with Clerk Bryan evidencing the security interest of the FmHA. The next day a check drawn on the supervised account, signed by McDonald and countersigned by an FmHA employee, was delivered to Davis in the amount of $74,462.55. The check was made payable to Davis Tractor On April 1, 1981, Davis executed a termination statement, allegedly on behalf of BWAC, and presented it to the Clerk's office for filing. The termination statement filed was signed "Borg-Warner Acc. Corp. by: C. Welborn Davis, Dlr." Subsequently, the FmHA received the original financing statement filed July 30, 1980 marked "Satisfied and Cancelled of Record." On August 17, 1983, BWAC filed suit advancing various tort and contract theories against Defendants Davis, McDonald, the FmHA, the Board of Commissioners of Washington County, Georgia, Bryan and the George D. Warthen Bank. ¹ The district court entered a default judgment against Davis in the amount of $83,370.19 plus interest, attorney's fees and court costs. The court granted McDonald's Motion for Summary Judgment finding that Davis had the apparent authority to accept McDonald's payment thereby estopping BWAC from denying the existence of Davis' authority. The court also granted the Motion for Summary Judgment filed on behalf of Bryan and the Board of Commissioners. In response to BWAC's request for declaratory relief, the court found the security interest held by the United States, through the FmHA, had priority since BWAC's security interest had been extinguished. BWAC appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of McDonald, the Board of Commissioners and Bryan. ²

                Co.  The record reflects Davis understood that this check represented "full payment of debt created by the 'Retail Installment Contract.' "    After transmitting the check to Davis, McDonald made no further payments to BWAC on the debt originating from the Retail Installment Contract.  Davis admitted in his affidavit that he did not remit the portion representing full payment on the account to BWAC.  Davis went on to state, however, that he had received payments on behalf of BWAC in the past, and that BWAC had accepted these payments
                

DISCUSSION

An order granting summary judgment should be entered when the moving party has sustained the burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the opposing party. Adickes v. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157, 90 S.Ct. 1598, 1608, 26 L.Ed.2d 142 (1970); Morrison v. Washington County, 700 F.2d 678, 682 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 864, 104 S.Ct. 195, 78 L.Ed.2d 171 (1983); F.R.Civ.P. 56(c). This court uses the same legal standards when independently reviewing the district court's order granting summary judgment. Thrasher v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., 734 F.2d 637, 638 (11th Cir.1984), Morrison, 700 F.2d at 682. Reasonable doubts as to the facts should be resolved in favor of the nonmoving party. Thrasher, 734 F.2d at 639 (citation omitted). Furthermore, the court should deny summary judgment if reasonable minds could differ on the factual...