HomeMy WebLinkAbout0854 BADCOCK V. ROBERTS - CASE NO. 74-724
.
There are no~disputes of fact, both parties
having agreed to the following statement of fact. During ~
late 1972 through 1973 and into 1974, Mrs. Jerry Roberts,
a/k/a Jeannie Roberts (hereinafter referred to as "Roberts")
• entered into various purchase money security agreements
with the appellant, W. S. Badcock Corporation (hereinafter
ref~rred to as "Badcock"). Subsequently, Roberts defaulted
in her payments and Badcock prepared to file suit. However,
without knowledge or consent of Badcock and in direct
violation of the terms of the security agreement, Roberts
contracted to have her furnishings, including the items
obtained from Badcock, stored at the warehouse of the
defendant appellee, Law's Moving and Storage (hereinafter
referred to as "Law's"). Roberts concealed from Law's
and Law's had no way of knowing and in fact did not know
~ and had no knowledge whatsoever of the fact that Roberts
i
~
E
~ was in default on payments for the goods and that Badcock
t
f
}
~
; held a purchase money security agreement on the items.
>
~
~ Subsequently, upon learing of the situation,
~
~
~ Badcock filed a replevin claim against both Roberts and
~ Law's for which a show cause order was issued. At final
4
~ hearing, the trial court judge ordered the goods returned
~
to Badcock, but ordered Badcock to pay the storage bill
due to Law' s .
~ The question to be determined on this appeal is
_ whether, under Florida law, a vendor's unrecorded but per-
fected security interest in consumer goods has priority
over a subsequent warehouseman lien for storage charges
~
;
~r~~
~ - 2 -
- BooK 237 ~ 853 -
~
~
- - -
~ ~ ~
, . . . - . _ . . . ~
-