Jordan v. Butler concerns the right of a defrauded seller to reclaim possession of cattle under the Uniform Commercial Code and how that right is affected by a security interest in the same cattle. The essence of Jordan concerns a question of priority between the right of the defrauded seller to regain possession of the goods, if indeed such a right exists, and the claim of the secured party who had advanced money on the strength of collateral with no notice that the original seller was as yet unpaid. Based upon a theory of constructive trust, the Nebraska Supreme Court held that the secured party had a first lien on the fund which had been paid into court, with the balance to be applied on the judgment of Jordan against both Jack and Duane which had been rendered for the amount of the sale price of the cattle which were sold to Jack. The purpose of this article is not to criticize the rationale used by the court but rather to demonstrate another feasible approach to the problems presented by the factual situation in this case. This proposed solution would rely instead upon the relevant sections of the Uniform Commercial Code as adopted in Nebraska.
Kenneth C. Fritzler II,
Commercial Law—When Appropriate Why Not Apply the Uniform Commercial Code? Jordan v. Butler, 183 Neb. 626, 156 N.W.2d 778 (1968),
49 Neb. L. Rev. 703
Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol49/iss3/11