O'Neill v. Barnett Bank of Jacksonville, N. A.
| Decision Date | 30 June 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. II-94,II-94 |
| Parties | 24 UCC Rep.Serv. 779 Richard O'NEILL, Appellant, v. BARNETT BANK OF JACKSONVILLE, N. A., a National Banking Association, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
William J. Deas, of Howell & Deas, Jacksonville, for appellant.
James A. Bledsoe, Jr., of Mahoney, Hadlow & Adams, Jacksonville, for appellee.
O'Neill appeals from a final judgment entered in favor of Barnett following a nonjury trial in a replevin action. O'Neill, the buyer of an aircraft from Herlong Aviation (Herlong) in which Barnett had a prior security interest, contends that the trial court erred in finding that Barnett's security interest in the aircraft was valid and enforceable as to him and erred in failing to find that Barnett was estopped to enforce its security interest.
Barnett financed the purchase of the aircraft by Herlong. Barnett obtained a security agreement from Herlong and perfected its security interest by registering it with the Federal Aviation Administration. It also filed a financing statement in the public records of Duval County and with the Secretary of State. Herlong represented to Barnett that the aircraft would be used for flight instruction and would not be a part of its sales inventory. The security agreement provided that Herlong would not sell the aircraft without the prior written consent of Barnett. Notwithstanding the terms of the agreement, Herlong sold the aircraft to O'Neill without Barnett's consent.
At the time of the sale, Herlong, a fixed base operation, was engaged in the supply of fuel, maintenance, flight instruction and aircraft sales. The aircraft in litigation was being used by Herlong for rental purposes and had been rented to O'Neill on several occasions. At the time of the sale, O'Neill believed the aircraft was held by Herlong for rental purposes.
O'Neill did not make a search prior to nor at the time of purchase to see if there were any security interests on the aircraft. He did not have actual knowledge of Barnett's security interest.
Herlong subsequently defaulted in the payments required by the note and security agreement and Barnett discovered the sale of the aircraft to O'Neill. It then filed a replevin action.
In determining this appeal, the issues we must resolve are whether O'Neill was a buyer of the aircraft in the ordinary course of Herlong's business and whether Barnett's prior security interest was superior to O'Neill's subsequent ownership interest where it had properly registered its security interest with the Federal Aviation Administration. We resolve both issues in favor of Barnett.
Under Section 671.201(9), Florida Statutes (1975), a buyer in the ordinary course of business is a person who in good faith and without knowledge that the sale to him is in violation of the security interest of a third party in the goods buys in ordinary course from a person in the business of selling goods of that kind. A buyer in ordinary course of business takes free of a security interest created by his seller even though the security is perfected and even though the buyer knows of its existence. Section 679.307(1), Florida Statutes (1975).
Prior to and at the time of the purchase, O'Neill knew that the aircraft was used by Herlong for rental purposes, he had rented it on several occasions, he knew it was not a part of Herlong's sales inventory, he did not purchase it from Herlong's sales inventory and he knew that Herlong was primarily engaged in supplying fuel, maintenance, flight instruction and sales of aircraft. O'Neill knew that Herlong's principal business was fixed base operation, not the sale of aircraft. A sale incidental to the principal business does not make the seller a person in the business of selling goods of that kind. Hempstead Bank v. Andy's Car Rental System, Inc., 35 A.D.2d 35, 312 N.Y.S.2d 317 (1970). Prior to and at the time of the sale...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gary Aircraft Corp., Matter of
...544, 476 P.2d 401, 91 Cal.Rptr. 1 (in banc) (same), cert. denied, 1971, 404 U.S. 823, 92 S.Ct. 45, 30 L.Ed.2d 50; and O'Neill v. Barnett Bank, Fla.App.1978, 360 So.2d 150 (same) with, e.g., Danning v. World Airways, Inc. (In re Holiday Airlines), 9 Cir.1981, 647 F.2d 977 (FAA does not preem......
-
In re Air Florida Systems, Inc., Bankruptcy No. 84-01233-BKC-SMW-A
...provides a uniform nationwide mechanism for registering ownership and encumbrances of aircraft. See also O'Neill v. Barnett Bank of Jacksonville, N.A., 360 So.2d 150 (1st DCA Fla. 1978). Florida Statutes § 329.01 promotes such meaningful and uniform filing requirements. The IRS's failure to......
-
Bitzer-Croft Motors, Inc. v. Pioneer Bank & Trust Co., BITZER-CROFT
...3 Cal.3d 544, 91 Cal.Rptr. 1, 476 P.2d 401, cert. denied (1971), 404 U.S. 823, 92 S.Ct. 45, 30 L.Ed.2d 50; O'Neill v. Barnett Bank of Jacksonville (Fla.1978), 360 So.2d 150; Crescent City Aviation, Inc. v. Beverly Bank (1966), 139 Ind.App. 669, 219 N.E.2d 446, and Smith v. Eastern Airmotive......
-
Matter of Benton Trucking Service, Inc.
...principal business does not make the seller a person in the business of selling goods of that kind." O'Neill v. Barnett Bank, 24 U.C.C.Rep.Serv. 779, 781, 360 So.2d 150 (Fla.App.1978); Hempstead Bank v. Andy's Car Rental System, Inc., 35 A.D.2d 35, 312 N.Y.S.2d 317 (1970). Equipment is not ......