Court Opinion

ID: 9602085
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:51:42.771215+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:00.499963
License: Public Domain

Evans, Judge,
concurring specially.
Plaintiff filed an action in trover and the judge, sitting without the intervention of a jury, rendered a judgment in the lower court for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. The majority opinion in effect holds that because the undisputed evidence shows the property in question was sold under a carrier’s lien and purchased by defendant, this precludes all other inquiry into title to the property.
Enumeration of error number two complains because the trial court refused to allow proof that defendants were in possession of the property, albeit this was admitted by them in their pleadings. The other enumerations of error are of similar import, that is, no advantage could be gained by plaintiff if the premise of the majority opinion is correct to the effect that the sale under carrier’s lien, under Code Ann. § 109A-7—308 (4) of the Uniform Commercial Code passed absolute title to the purchaser.
I concur in the judgment.