Hill v. McGee
Decision Date | 06 April 1990 |
Citation | 562 So.2d 238 |
Parties | Kenneth Dale HILL v. Enoch McGEE. 89-186. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Rodney B. Slusher, Florence, for appellant.
John E. Higginbotham and Thomas W. McCutcheon of Higginbotham & Whitten, Florence, for appellee.
This lawsuit involves a claim of conversion based on the disposition of three 1984 Freightliner trucks and one 1978 International truck. The plaintiff, Kenneth Dale Hill, sold the realty and other assets of Ponderosa Manufacturing Company (including these trucks) on August 2, 1988, to Douglas Blan Stewart, Jr., and his wife. As part of the sales transaction, Stewart and his wife executed a document styled "security agreement" and a UCC-1 financing statement. The UCC-1 financing statement was filed with the Alabama secretary of state on August 16, 1988.
Upon taking possession of the vehicles, Stewart sold them to Muscle Shoals Mack Sales, Inc. ("Mack Sales"), providing certificates of title for the trucks. Mack Sales subsequently sold them to Enoch McGee for the sum of $38,688.75. Shortly thereafter, McGee sold the vehicles. Stewart and his wife defaulted on the promissory note to Hill in October 1988 and Hill foreclosed, taking possession of the remaining assets of the corporation. Stewart has disappeared.
Hill sued McGee and Mack Sales on February 2, 1989. The complaint alleged conversion of the four vehicles. McGee filed an answer and filed a cross-claim against his co-defendant, Mack Sales, on March 20, 1989. McGee subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment, which was heard on June 15, 1989. The trial court entered a summary judgment in favor of defendant McGee on the grounds that the Alabama Uniform Certificate of Title and Antitheft Act, Code 1975, §§ 32-8-1 et seq. (the "Act"), provides the "exclusive" method of perfecting a security interest in a motor vehicle covered by the Act:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Locklin, Matter of
...the Alabama Uniform Certificate of Title and Antitheft Act ("the act" or "the statute"), ALA.CODE § 32-8-1 et seq. In Hill v. McGee, 562 So.2d 238 (Ala.1990), the plaintiff argued that his security interest in certain trucks was perfected by the filing of a UCC-1 financing statement with th......
-
In re Jones
...of security interest in motor vehicles required to be titled ... shall be exclusive." ALA. CODE § 32–8–66 ; see also Hill v. McGee, 562 So.2d 238, 240 (Ala.1990) (explaining policy reasons for exclusivity of security interest perfection under AUCTAA).2. Perfection of a Pawnshop Lien on a Mo......
-
In re Riddlesprigger
...of Title and Antitheft Act. Ala. Code 32-8-61 ; In re Jones , 544 B.R. 692, 698–99 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 2016) ; see also Hill v. McGee , 562 So. 2d 238, 240 (Ala. 1990) (holding "[w]here motor vehicles are concerned, this Act rather than Article 9 of the U.C.C. governs the perfection of securi......
-
Harkness v. EZ Pawn Alabama, Inc.
...of Title Act provides the exclusive method of perfecting a security interest in a motor vehicle covered by the Act. Hill v. McGee, 562 So.2d 238 (Ala.1990). Section 32-8-61 "(a) Unless excepted by this section a security interest in a vehicle for which a certificate of title is required by ......