Martin v. Heady (1980)

Citation: 103 Cal.App.3d 580, 163 Cal.Rptr. 117. Court: California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Three. Decided: March 20, 1980. Opinion: Cobey, Acting P. J.

Source note (2026-10-18):

• Links on this page to https://static.case.law/cal-app-3d/103/cases/0580-01.json are 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.

Facts

An aircraft keeper sold a customized DC-3 at its own lien auction for USD 5,473.42 in repair/storage charges, then resold it after further work. The plaintiff challenged the sale through a conversion action. The trial court entered judgment for the defendants. The appellate court accepted that the plaintiff had actual advance notice and had not exercised the printed 20-day redemption right. Full opinion, pp. 582–586.

Holding

Reversed. The nonconsensual aircraft-lien sale procedure in Code of Civil Procedure §§ 1208.65–1208.68 violated California Constitution article I, § 7(a) because it supplied no opportunity for a hearing before permanent deprivation. The printed sale provisions could not validate the sale merely because the owner received actual notice and failed to redeem. Full opinion, pp. 587–590.

Reasoning

The statutory sale power was absent at common law. The court treated its nonconsensual delegation as state action under California constitutional law. It expressly acknowledged the contrary federal state-action approach in Flagg Brothers and reached an independent state-constitutional result. It also observed that a single advertisement in a semiweekly paper did not satisfy the incorporated ten-day publication rule. Full opinion, pp. 585–590.

Practical impact

The decision prevents treating the still-printed CCP auction and redemption provisions as an operative self-help title playbook. It does not invalidate every aircraft lien, award a fixed damages amount, adjudicate all subsequent purchasers’ rights, or address the later recorded-repair-lien framework. The separate 1992 framework provides a superior-court hearing and FAA-recordable judgment: see california § 12.3 and Bus. & Prof. Code § 9798.3, independently retrieved from the official bulk code export, member LAW_SECTION_TBL_83500.lob.

Good-law status

The retrieved opinion records denial of Supreme Court hearing on May 21, 1980. No contrary California holding was located in this review; the still_good label is not an exhaustive citator certification. Flagg Brothers predates this decision and was expressly distinguished on the state-constitutional ground. Full opinion.

Source provenance

The complete opinion, including footnotes, was retrieved on October 17, 2026 from the Caselaw Access Project URL above. It is an unofficial reproduction of the court’s decision, not an official court-hosted copy or a case summary. Independent-review details: schema/verification/california-independent-review-2026-10-17.md.

Applies in →

california · aircraft-mechanics-liens-and-non-judicial-sales · aircraft-title-liens-and-the-faa-registry

Legal information, not legal advice. This page summarizes a retrieved decision; later law and the facts of a particular transaction require separate verification.