379 S.W.3d 883
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Hilty Family Limited Partnership (HFLP) sought replevin and damages for an above-ground irrigation system on farmland now owned by Scott as Trustee of the Scott Trust; trial court ruled the system passed with the land and denied relief, and HFLP appealed.
- The farmland in question is in Henry County, Missouri, and was subject to two deeds of trust: a first deed of trust in favor of Farm Credit Services and a second deed of trust from the Bill Hoppe Trust.
- In 2008, Vassar (managing Deepwater Seed Farms) financed irrigation equipment with a loan from UMB Bank, securing it with a security agreement stating collateral was “All Equipment.”
- UMB Bank filed a UCC financing statement, but the purchaser was misidentified as Deepwater Seed Farm, LLC, and no fixture filing was made in Henry County records; bank treated the equipment as personal property, not a fixture.
- Foreclosure of the Bill Hoppe Trust’s second deed occurred March 2010; UMB Bank then sold the note to HFLP in April 2010; Scott purchased the farm at foreclosure on April 14, 2010.
- Hilty attended the foreclosure sale but did not claim priority to the irrigation system; the trial court held Scott purchased the property for value, including the irrigation system, and denied HFLP’s claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the irrigation system was a fixture conveying with the land | Hilty contends the system is personal property, not a fixture, and thus not conveyed. | Scott contends the system is a fixture, hence conveyed by the trustee’s deed. | System is a fixture; conveyed with land. |
| Whether HFLP had a right to possession via the security agreement | Hilty argues the debt and security agreement give possession rights upon default. | Scott argues he was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the lien. | Right to possession via security interest not established; fixture analysis controls. |
Key Cases Cited
- Buchholz Mortuaries, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 113 S.W.3d 192 (Mo. banc 2003) (fixture status can pass with real estate)
- Cattoor v. Wells, 641 S.W.2d 492 (Mo.App. E.D.1982) (fixtures pass by sale of real property if still fixtures)
- Freeman v. Barrs, 237 S.W.3d 285 (Mo.App. S.D.2007) (intent, adaptation, and annexation determine fixture status)
- Rothermich v. Union Planters National Bank, 10 S.W.3d 610 (Mo.App. E.D.2000) (intent controlling; adaptation and annexation considered)
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (standard of review for bench-tried cases)
- Essex Contracting Inc. v. Jefferson County, 277 S.W.3d 647 (Mo. banc 2009) ( Murphy framework applied on appeal)
- White v. Director of Revenue, 321 S.W.3d 298 (Mo. banc 2010) (when facts are stipulated, appellate review focuses on legal conclusions)