In re: WILLIAM W. PIERCE, JR. v. Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, Inc.

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 13a0627n.06
No. 12-5763
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
In re: WILLIAM W. PIERCE, JR.,
Debtor,
MAXIE E. HIGGASON, JR.,
CHAPTER 7TRUSTEE,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
VANDERBILT MORTGAGE AND FINANCE,
INC.,
Defendant-Appellant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
KENTUCKY
AMENDED OPINION
Before: MOORE, SUTTON, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.
Bernice B. Donald, Circuit Judge. Maxie E. Higgason, Jr., a Chapter 7 Trustee, brought
a strong-arm proceeding against Appellant Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, Inc. (Vanderbilt) to
avoid a lien claimed by Vanderbilt against William W. Pierce, Jr.’s manufactured home. Vanderbilt
failed to submit its Certificate of Title and title lien statement to the county clerk in Pierce’s county
of residence for notation of its security interest on the Certificate of Title. We quite recently
confronted virtually identical factual and legal issues in Vanderbilt Mortgage & Fin., Inc. v.
Westenhoefer, No. 11-6216, (6th Cir. March ___, 2013). There, we concluded, that a security
interest in a manufactured home is not properly perfected under Kentucky law unless the Certificate

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 12-5763
Vanderbilt Morg. & Fin., Inc. v. Higgason
of Title has been submitted to the county clerk in the debtor’s county of residence for the security
interest to be noted on the Certificate of Title by that clerk. That did not happen here. On the basis
of Westenhoefer, we AFFIRM.
- 2 -

-- 2 of 2 --