Opinion ID: 715394
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: California Producer's Lien Act

Text: 42 The District Court found that Roxford violated the CPLA and imposed a constructive trust on those proceeds, for which John was found to be the trustee. The District Court concluded that John converted the proceeds by assigning them to Union Bank. In relevant part, the CPLA provides: 43 Every producer of any farm product that sells any product which is grown by him to any processor under contract, express or implied, in addition to all other rights and remedies which are provided for by law, has a lien upon such product and upon all processed or manufactured forms of such farm product for his labor, care, and expense in growing and harvesting such product. 44 Cal.Food & Agric.Code § 55631. The lien attaches on all of the delivered product from the date it is delivered by the producer to the processor. Cal.Food & Agric. § 55632 (West 1995). The lien remains on the product only as long as the processor has possession thereof. In re Loretto Winery, 898 F.2d 715, 720-21 (9th Cir.1990); Cal.Food & Agric. § 55634. A producer who remains unpaid after dispossession of the encumbered product may maintain a personal action in order to recover the underlying debt. Cal.Food & Agric. § 55647 (West 1995). 45 A constructive trust is an appropriate mechanism for enforcement of an debt obligation created by the CPLA, where, as here, it will be used to prevent unjust enrichment and to compel the restoration of property to which one is justly entitled. Taylor v. Polackwich, 145 Cal.App.3d at 1022. See also Weiss, supra. 46 A constructive trust is especially well suited to the instant case in light of the CPLA's stated purpose of assuring that producers receive full payment for their farm products. In re Loretto Winery, 898 F.2d at 720. The California legislature has declared that the statutory provision are to be liberally construed to accomplish the Food and Agricultural Code's purposes of promoting and protecting the agricultural industry, and protecting the public health, safety, and welfare. In re Loretto Winery, 898 F.2d at 721 (citing Cal.Food & Agric.Code § 3 (West 1986)). Accord McKee v. Bell-Carter Olive Co., 186 Cal.App.3d 1230, 1242, 231 Cal.Rptr. 304, 312 (1986) (PSA is remedial in purpose and thus entitled to liberal construction). 47 The constructive trust is not defeated by the fact that thing converted by John was money. Although money cannot generally be the subject of a conversion action, an exception is made where the funds converted are specific, identifiable sums. See e.g., In re Littleton, 106 B.R. 632, 635 (9th Cir.B.A.P.1989), aff'd, 942 F.2d 551 (9th Cir.1991). At issue here are precisely such specific, identifiable sums--those sums assigned to Union Bank in July, August, and September of 1989--and thus, the conversion claim does not fail on this ground. 48 AFFIRMED.