Hilley v

Lunsford, 29 Ga. App. 398, 115 S.E. 667, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 29 (1923). How mechanic may enforce lien. — Whether the mechanic asserts a lien by retention of the property or by surrendering possession and recording the lien, the mechanic may enforce payment by foreclosure proceedings according to the provisions of O.C.G.A. § 44-14-550. Fitzgerald Trust Co. v. Burkhart, 12 Ga. App. 222, 77 S.E. 7, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 506 (1913). Mechanic may arrest by claim proceedings to levy property. — While a foreclosure of a lien is necessary before sale under it, yet where another levies on the property, it is proper for the mechanic 779 to arrest the proceeding by claim. Hurley & Smith v. Epps, 69 Ga. 611, 1882 Ga. LEXIS 275 (1882). Foreclosure not grounds for trover. — Where a mechanic has asserted a lien on personal property for repairs thereon and has enforced payment thereof by foreclosure proceedings, the owner cannot bring trover against the mechanic. Fitzgerald Trust Co. v. Burkhart, 12 Ga. App. 222, 77 S.E. 7, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 506 (1913). Holding car for payment. — Where defendant mechanic holds plaintiff’s automobile in assertion of a special lien for repairs, the mechanic’s refusal to redeliver the automobile to the plaintiff in trover upon demand, without payment of the repair bill, constitutes no conversion of the property, and plaintiff cannot maintain action in trover for its recovery. Truscott v. Garner, 92 Ga. App. 95, 88 S.E.2d 197, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 530 (1955). Retention is not conversion. — Where one receives possession of an automobile for the purpose of making repairs and holds the vehicle in assertion of a special lien for making such repairs, the holder’s refusal to deliver the automobile upon demand does not constitute a conversion. Boatright v. Padgett Motor Sales, Inc., 117 Ga. App. 578, 161 S.E.2d 402, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1149 (1968). Where there is agreement to balance accounts from time to time, the right to hold the property is waived and the lien is lost unless a claim of lien is filed. Gearreld v. Woodruff, 13 Ga. App. 450, 79 S.E. 355, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 192 (1913). Where a mechanic does work on open account repairing several articles the mechanic cannot at the end of a year of such transactions record a claim of lien for all of them. Palin v. Cooke, 125 Ga. 442, 54 S.E. 90, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 187 (1906). Possession of car irrelevant where vendor title superior to mechanic’s lien. — Although the retention of the automobile is the proper method of asserting the mechanic’s lien under O.C.G.A. § 44-14-363, the allegation of possession is irrelevant where a mechanic’s lien for 44-14-363 repair work and material of the credit of a vendee is inferior to the vendor’s contract retaining the title, regardless of who has possession of the automobile at the time of the levy. Dixon v. GMAC, 105 Ga. App. 413, 124 S.E.2d 660, 1962 Ga. App. LEXIS 939 (1962). Legal title takes precedence over mechanic’s lien. — There is nothing contained or implied in O.C.G.A. § 44-14363 or the decisions thereunder that would indicate that a mechanic’s lien, any more than any other lien, was intended to operate, or by any possible construction could be made to operate, in such a manner as to exert priority over an outstanding and valid legal title. Manchester Motors, Inc. v. F & M Bank, 91 Ga. App. 811, 87 S.E.2d 342, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 870 (1955). O.C.G.A. § 44-14-363 has never at any time been construed to extend beyond mere liens, as such, and to effect a priority over a legal title in another. There is a clear distinction between a lien and a legal title. Manchester Motors, Inc. v. F & M Bank, 91 Ga. App. 811, 87 S.E.2d 342, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 870 (1955). Unrecorded bill of sale to secure debt uniformly superior to any lien arising by operation of law, as is the case with any mechanic’s lien. Manchester Motors, Inc. v. F & M Bank, 91 Ga. App. 811, 87 S.E.2d 342, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 870 (1955). Failure to record. — The mechanic’s lien of an aircraft repair company which was not recorded with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was not valid, thus the security interest of a bank which was recorded with the FAA after the mechanic initiated lien foreclosure proceedings was superior. Southern Horizons Aviation v. F & M Bank, 231 Ga. App. 55, 497 S.E.2d 637, 1998 Ga. App. LEXIS 323 (1998). Perfected security interest under former O.C.G.A. § 11-9-310 superior to mechanic’s lien. — Under former O.C.G.A. § 11-9-310 (see now O.C.G.A. § 11-9-333), a perfected security interest takes priority over all liens described in O.C.G.A. § 44-14-320, including mechanic’s lien as provided for in O.C.G.A. § 4414-363. Newton Ford Tractor Co. v. JI 780 44-14-363 MORTGAGES, SECURITY, LIENS Case Credit Corp., 163 Ga. App. 497, 294 S.E.2d 723, 1982 Ga. App. LEXIS 2550 (1982). A bank’s security interest in the inventory of a carpet manufacturer took priority over a mechanic’s lien. Nationsbank v. Hardwick Carpets Int’l, Inc., 233 Ga. App. 894, 506 S.E.2d 174, 1998 Ga. App. LEXIS 1096 (1998). Perfected security interest under O.C.G.A. § 40-3-54 superior to mechanic’s lien. — A security interest on a vehicle which is perfected pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 40-3-54 is superior to a mechanic’s lien on a vehicle which is perfected under the provisions of O.C.G.A. § 44-14-363. Gwinnett Sales & Serv.