Court Opinion

ID: 9602056
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:51:26.79816+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:00.323569
License: Public Domain

*219Gunter, Justice,
concurring specially.
I concur in the judgment rendered by the court in this case, but it is my position that the bank’s security interest in this case, whether that security interest be perfected or not, would not have priority over the liens against the real estate properly asserted by the materialmen.
As I understand the Uniform Commercial Code a "security interest” means an interest in personal property or fixtures which secures payment or performance of an obligation. Code Ann. § 109A-1 — 201 (37). Under the Uniform Commercial Code a secured party cannot have a "security interest” in realty.
Code Ann. § 67-2001 gives to materialmen a special lien on real estate. In this case the materialmen acquired liens on the real estate of the owner. The bank had only a security interest in "contract rights” between the owner and the contractor. And had the bank in this case properly perfected its security interest, the bank still would not have had any right to or claim of lien upon the real estate. Therefore, under the circumstances here, there was no way for the bank to come ahead of or divest the liens of materialmen who had a "special lien upon the real estate.”
Code Ann. § 109A-9 — 310 provides that "[A] perfected security interest in collateral takes priority over each and all of the liens, claims and rights described in §§ 67-1701 and 113-1508, . . .” The words in this Code section, "a perfected security interest in collateral,” cannot be read to mean "a perfected security interest in real estate,” because there can be no security interest in real estate under the Uniform Commercial Code.
Code § 67-1701 enumerates a number of liens that can be acquired against personal property, and a perfected security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code does have priority over liens against personalty that are enumerated in Code § 67-1701. *220However, since there can be no security interest in real estate under the Uniform Commercial Code, a perfected security interest pursuant to Code Ann. § 109A-9 — 310 does not take priority over a special statutory lien on real estate such as that accorded materialmen in Georgia.
My reading of the majority opinion leaves with me the implication that a perfected security interest in collateral would pursuant to Code Ann. § 109A-9 — 310, take priority over a materialmen’s special lien on real estate granted by Code Ann. § 67-2001. That is not my view.
I concur in the judgment of affirmance because a materialmen’s lien against real estate takes priority over a perfected security interest in collateral as the terms "security interest” and "collateral” are used in the Uniform Commercial Code. In the context of this case the owner, in order to clear the title to his real estate, had to first pay the liens of materialmen whose material improved his real estate; and then any balance owed on the contract after paying the materialmen, thereby divesting their liens, was due the bank in satisfaction of its security interest in "contract rights.”
I am authorized to state that Mr. Chief Justice Grice and Mr. Justice Ingram concur in this concurring opinion.