Rebsamen Companies, Inc. v. Arkansas State Hospital Emp. Federal Credit Union, 74--329

• Decision Date: 19 May 1975
• Docket Number: No. 74--329,74--329
• Citation: 258 Ark. 160,522 S.W.2d 845
• Parties: REBSAMEN COMPANIES, INC., d/b/a Rebsamen Ford Company, Appellant, v. ARKANSAS STATE HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Appellee.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Page 845

522 S.W.2d 845

258 Ark. 160

REBSAMEN COMPANIES, INC., d/b/a Rebsamen Ford Company, Appellant, v. ARKANSAS STATE HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Appellee.

No. 74--329.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

May 19, 1975.

Moses, McClellan, Arnold, Owen & McDermott by William L. Owen, Little Rock, for appellant.

Walker & Hirby by H. Oscar Hirby, Little Rock, for appellee.

BYRD, Justice.

This litigation arises out of the sale of a 1974 Ford pickup truck by appellant, Robsamen Companies, Inc., d/b/a Rebsamen Ford Company, to George H. Miller and Miller's financing arrangements with appellee, Arkansas State Hospital Employees Federal Credit Union. The trial court found that appellant had agreed to record appellee's lien against the truck and that because of appellant's failure to record the lien, it was jointly and severally liable with George H. Miller for the balance due on the note together with interest and attorney's fees. The trial court also gave appellee a lien on the truck in the possession of George H. Miller together with a writ for possession. For reversal appellant contends:

'I. The trial court erred in awarding appellee a judgment against the appellant, Rebsamen Ford, upon the promissory note executed by the other defendant George Miller, to which appellant was not a party.

II. There is no substantial evidence to support a contractual relationship between appellant and appellee.'

Edna Miller, appellee's office manager, testified that when George Miller made application for a loan he presented one of appellant's forms showing that he was purchasing a 1974 Ford pickup, Serial No. F1OAUT24479. That after talking with the appellant's salesman and the billing department she caused appellee's check No. 20704 to be drawn payable to George H. Miller and Rebsamen Ford Inc., in the amount of $2975.00. In accordance with her conversation with the billing department she placed in red ink the notation on the check, 'Please record our lien in amount of this check 1974 Ford pickup F1OAUT24479.' After waiting a reasonable time to receive notification from the State Motor Vehicle Department that appellee's lien had been recorded, she started checking with the Motor Vehicle Department to see why she had not received the notification of the perfection of her lien. In her check with the Motor Vehicle Department she determined that appellant had sold the Ford pickup F1OAUT24479 to Karl Krick. She also determined that on November 29, 1973, appellant had sold a Ford pickup F1OGUS87202 to George H. Miller and had treated the same as a 'cash transaction.' Appellee's check No. 20704, supra, under date of December 1, 1973, had been endorsed by both appellant and George H. Miller. Miller was then in default and owed a current balance of $2,847.36.

Gene Beavers, appellant's business manager, testified that as far as appellant was concerned the sale to George H. Miller was a cash deal.

Curtice Ratcliff, appellant's sales manager, testified that Travis Henderson and Gary Williams were the salesmen involved in the transaction and that when they brought the transaction to him for approval nothing was said to him about financing.

When we consider the evidence of Mrs. Edna Miller, together with the notation on the check and the fact that the check was made out to George H. Miller and appellant, we find sufficient evidence to sustain the Chancellor's finding that appellant had agreed to record the lien. In fact it is difficult to understand how appellant could accept the check...