Bramble Transportation, Inc. v. Sam Senter Sales, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
15 later published cases cite this decision.
- Ferdinand J. Snow Co. v. Waldick Aero-Space Devices, Inc. (In re Waldick Aero-Space Devices, Inc.) (District Court, D. New Jersey 1987)
- George W. Ultch Lumber Co. v. Hall Plastering, Inc. (District Court, W.D. Missouri 1979)
- In re the Shepard Co. (R.I. 1975)
- HV JVCO I, LLC v. Open Sunday, LLC (Superior Court of Delaware 2026)
- W.C. Fore Trucking Co. v. Biloxi Prestress Concrete, Inc. (5th Cir. 1996)
- Concrete Equipment Co. v. Fox (In re Vigil Bros. Construction) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1996)
- In re Southern Vermont Supply, Inc. (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont 1986)
- Matter of Sunberg (United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Iowa 1983)
- Brent Explorations, Inc. v. Karst Enterprises, Inc. (In re Brent Explorations, Inc.) (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado 1983)
- Thorp Commercial Corporation v. Northgate Industries, Inc. (8th Cir. 1981)
- Farns Associates, Inc. v. South Side Bank (Ill. App. Ct. 1981)
- Thorp Commercial Corp. v. Northgate Industries, Inc. (8th Cir. 1981)
- Daly v. Shrimplin (Wyo. 1980)
- Manson State Bank v. Diamond (Iowa 1975)
- Walker Bank & Trust Co. v. Smith (Nev. 1972)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
This appellant, Bramble Transportation, Inc. (Bramble), plaintiff below, asks us to reverse a judgment of the Superior Court in favor of Sam Senter Sales, Inc. (Sales) and Walter E. Heller and Company of Florida (Heller), defendant and inter-venor below. The opinion of the Superior Court is reported in Del.Super., 294 A.2d 97.
The facts are fully stated in the lower Court’s opinion and need not be repeated here. We concur with the rulings made by the learned Judge below. We agree that the requirements of the Uniform Commercial Code § 9-402 were met by Heller’s filing in Florida, and that Heller, through the series of assignments, held a perfected security interest in the Draper account as of the date of those assignments, which was prior to the attempted attachment by Bramble.
Appellant’s argument that the attachment should remain effective notwithstanding Heller’s perfected security interest has no merit. Sales’ entire interest was assigned to Heller, so that Sales had no legal interest to be attached.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.