Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): at 134; Nelson, 215 Kan. at 634, 527 P.2d at 1062; DeVore, 207 Kan. at 503, 485 P.2d at 1017; Atchison County Auction, 10 Kan.App.2d at 389, 699 P.2d at 1038. All of the Kansas cases holding an auctioneer liable for conversion despite its good faith and lack of knowledge have dealt with sales in violation of perfected security interests. But because the Kansas cases make the commission merchant liable because it stands in the principal’s shoes, and not based upon any perception of duty of inquiry or action by anyone, we can discern no basis to distinguish between the liability of an auctioneer based on the debtor’s violation of a perfected security interest and the violation of an unperfected security interest. See United States v. Friend’s Stockyard, Inc., 600 F.2d 9 (4th Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>); Commercial Bank v. Hales, 281 Ark. 439, 665 
 Holding statements: (A) holding a principal liable for its sales agents misrepresentations (B) holding an auctioneer liable for conversion when sales violated an unperfected security interest (C) holding that a buyer who purchases goods subject to an express warranty that the goods are free from all liens takes free of any unperfected security interest (D) holding defendants personally liable for alleged conversion even when acting in corporate capacity (E) holding that the trustee could not avoid a security interest under section 549 when that security interest was authorized by the bankruptcy court
Output (English): holding that the trustee could not avoid a security interest under section 549 when that security interest was authorized by the bankruptcy court