General Electric Capital Corp. v. Advance Petroleum, Inc. (1995)
Citation: 660 So. 2d 1139 · Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District · Decided: September 13, 1995 · Opinion: Levy, J.
Source note (2026-10-18):
- Links on this page to
https://static.case.law/so2d/660/cases/1139-01.json,https://static.case.law/so3d/60/cases/1120-01.jsonare an (unofficial Caselaw Access Project copy, retrieved before 2026-10-18; host disallows automated access); no official or otherwise permitted full-text copy was located on 2026-10-18.
Case page. Legal information, not legal advice. Last verified: 2026-10-17.
Independent source check (2026-10-17): the full opinion and footnotes were retrieved in an unofficial reporter copy hosted by the Florida Bar Business Law Section. Publisher headnotes were not treated as the court’s reasoning. The historical CAP URL below was not used for this independent check; no citator was run.
Facts
An Argentine airline leased a Boeing 747 from GECC and bought jet fuel on credit in Miami from Advance Petroleum (API), running up about USD 279,887. On default GECC repossessed the aircraft by replevin (using the Dade County sheriff) on August 11, 1993 and flew it out of Florida the next day. On August 20, 1993 API filed a verified notice of claim of lien in Dade County under §§ 329.41 and 329.51, Fla. Stat., and filed a copy with the FAA registry in Oklahoma City on August 27, 1993. API sued to foreclose; the trial court granted summary judgment and entered a foreclosure judgment for USD 311,173.96. (Opinion text retrieved from https://static.case.law/so2d/660/cases/1139-01.json on 2026-10-17.)
Holding
Affirmed. API “clearly has a valid, perfected lien on the subject aircraft” under §§ 329.41, 329.51 and 329.01, on the record presented; footnote 3 expressly says GECC did not attack the lien’s validity on appeal. The opinion does not resolve every possible priority contest. Although the aircraft had left Florida, the court had in personam jurisdiction over GECC and may “require GECC to locate and return the subject aircraft to Dade County, so as to proceed with the court’s order of foreclosure,” including by contempt; it “may not, however, issue any orders which directly act on the aircraft” until it is back in the jurisdiction.
Reasoning
A lien entitles the lienor “to seize the property and sell it in satisfaction of the debt.” A court with personal jurisdiction may act on a party’s interest in property outside its territory without acting on the property itself (Fall v. Eastin). In a footnote the court explained that FAA recording is mandatory and federal law “preempts any state law which would purport to give priority to a claim against an aircraft where that claim was not recorded with the FAA” while a competing claim was (Philko Aviation v. Shacket), but where both claims are FAA-recorded, priority is a state-law question.
Practical impact
- Buyers / lenders: a Florida fuel or repair lien on an aircraft is non-possessory — it survives the aircraft’s departure and repossession by the lessor-lender, and is perfected by a county-clerk filing (and FAA recording). Pre-purchase diligence must cover circuit-court clerk records in Florida counties where the aircraft was fueled or serviced, not only the FAA registry. Current § 329.51 requires the lien notice within 90 days of the last furnishing and states that possession is not required (2026 Fla. Stat., retrieved 2026-10-16).
- Lienholders: this case proceeded by judicial foreclosure and addresses the court’s jurisdiction over the owner. It does not decide that every aircraft mechanic/fuel claim lacks every possible nonjudicial remedy; any alternative must satisfy its own governing statute.
Good-law status
Followed on the jurisdiction point by PNCEF, LLC v. South Aviation, Inc., 60 So. 3d 1120 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (opinion retrieved from https://static.case.law/so3d/60/cases/1120-01.json on 2026-10-17), which also held that an aircraft lessee waived any priority of its own liens by contract. No citator was run.
Applies in →
florida, aircraft-mechanics-liens-and-non-judicial-sales, aircraft-title-liens-and-the-faa-registry, aircraft
Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the current primary source before relying on this summary.
Independent Primary-Text Comparison — 2026-10-17
PNCEF follows jurisdiction reasoning and finds contractual priority waiver. Not exclusive enforcement for every mechanic claim or universal priority ruling. Current operative comparison: § 329.41; § 329.51; § 329.01. Full holding verification is not a comprehensive still-good-law certificate. Where the former source URL failed, the working full-opinion source now appears in metadata; original failed receipts remain separate in the review evidence.
Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources and consult a licensed Florida attorney before acting.