## Facts

- Bernice Guthridge held a life estate in a farm, and her son, Larry Guthridge, owned the remainder interest.
- Larry operated the farm as Bernice’s tenant.
- In 1983, Larry obtained a loan from First Trust and Savings Bank of Moville (the bank) to purchase feed bunks and granted the bank a security interest in the bunks.
- The feed bunks were located on the farm and were large and heavy; they formed part of a fence line on the property’s boundary.
- Larry attached the bunks to the land using steel cables and posts; aside from their weight, the attachment included an easily removable steel cable.
- The bank filed a financing statement covering Larry’s personal property with the Iowa Secretary of State.
- In 1985, Larry conveyed his interest in the farm to Bernice by quitclaim deed in satisfaction of two years of unpaid rent.
- After the conveyance, Bernice claimed the feed bunks were fixtures that passed with the real estate to her.
- The bank filed a replevin action seeking immediate possession of the feed bunks; the district court ruled for the bank and issued a writ of replevin.
- Bernice appealed, challenging the determination that the bunks were personal property rather than fixtures.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the trial court’s finding that the feed bunks were not fixtures under Iowa real-property law.
2. If the bunks were not fixtures, whether the bank’s security interest and replevin remedy entitled it to immediate possession against Bernice’s claim arising from the quitclaim deed.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Iowa affirmed.
- There was substantial evidence to support the trial court’s finding that the feed bunks were personal property, not fixtures.
- The court relied on circumstances showing no intent to make the bunks a permanent part of the farm, including Larry’s status as a tenant when the bunks were placed and his act of granting the bank a security interest in them.
- The character of the attachment (including an easily removable steel cable) supported the conclusion that the bunks were meant to remain removable equipment.
- Because the bunks remained personal property subject to the bank’s perfected security interest, the bank was entitled to possession through replevin.

## Legal Principles

- Replevin is a law action to enforce a plaintiff’s right to immediate possession of property wrongfully taken or detained; on appeal, the trial court’s fact findings are binding if supported by substantial evidence.
- Under Iowa’s UCC, goods are “fixtures” when they become so related to particular real estate that an interest in them arises under real estate law; Iowa real-property law controls the fixture determination.
- Iowa uses a three-factor fixture test: (1) actual annexation to the realty (or something appurtenant), (2) use in connection with the realty, and (3) intent of the annexing party to make a permanent addition to the freehold.
- Intent is inferred from objective circumstances, including the nature of the attachment and the annexing party’s relationship to the land; items installed by a tenant for a livestock/business operation tend to be treated as removable personal property rather than part of the real estate.
- Where there is some attachment, the party asserting the goods are not fixtures bears the burden to prove they remained personal property.
- If collateral is not a fixture, an Article 9 filing for goods (such as filing a financing statement with the Secretary of State) is sufficient; a real-estate fixture filing is required only if the goods are fixtures.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed the writ of replevin because substantial evidence supported the finding that Larry’s feed bunks—lightly attached and used for his livestock operation while he was a tenant—were not intended as permanent parts of the farm, so they remained personal property subject to the bank’s perfected security interest and recoverable from Bernice despite the later quitclaim deed.


First Trust and Savings Bank of Moville v. Guthridge, 445 N.W.2d 401 (1989)