## Facts

- In October 1997, Shane Lee Bennett and Robin Marie Bennett bought a manufactured home to place on their ranch in Nebraska as their residence.
- The home arrived in two halves and had to be joined on-site.
- The home lacked a steel frame suitable for attaching wheels and towing like a typical mobile home.
- At purchase, the Bennetts told the seller they intended to attach the home to the real estate.
- The Bennetts borrowed funds from Gothenburg State Bank to pay the down payment and installation costs.
- The Bennetts financed the remaining purchase price through an installment sales contract with a lender whose interest was later held by GreenPoint Credit.
- Before the home purchase, the Bennetts had other loans with the bank (and/or its predecessor) secured by liens on their land and other assets.
- The bank had recorded two deeds of trust against the ranch; one recorded in March 1997 covered fixtures and included a future-advances clause.
- The Bennetts installed the home on a concrete foundation and basement, connected it to underground utility lines (electricity, water, telephone), and built a deck.
- In October 1997, GreenPoint’s predecessor perfected its security interest by noting its lien on the manufactured home’s certificate of title.
- Nebraska law treats manufactured homes as mobile homes for which perfection follows motor-vehicle/certificate-of-title rules.
- The Bennetts filed bankruptcy in April 2001, and the bank and GreenPoint litigated priority in an adversary proceeding.

## Issues

1. Under Nebraska law, is a manufactured home installed on a foundation with utility connections treated for perfection and priority purposes as titled personal property (mobile/manufactured home) rather than as a fixture covered by a recorded deed of trust?
2. If certificate-of-title rules apply, does a creditor with a lien noted on the home’s certificate of title have priority over a lender relying on an earlier recorded deed of trust on the land (including fixture language and a future-advances clause)?

## Decision

- The court treated the manufactured home as collateral subject to Nebraska’s certificate-of-title system for mobile/manufactured homes, even though it was placed on a foundation and connected to utilities.
- Because GreenPoint (through its predecessor) perfected by having its lien noted on the home’s certificate of title, GreenPoint held the superior security interest in the home.
- The bank’s earlier recorded deed of trust on the real estate (including fixture language and a future-advances clause) did not give the bank priority in the manufactured home against a properly perfected title lien.
- The court resolved the priority dispute in favor of GreenPoint as to the manufactured home.

## Legal Principles

- When state law places manufactured/mobile homes within a certificate-of-title regime, perfection and priority generally turn on compliance with the title statute (typically lien notation on the certificate of title).
- Recording a deed of trust or similar real-estate instrument—without title-based perfection—does not defeat a competing security interest that is properly perfected on the certificate of title for the manufactured/mobile home.
- Physical installation features (foundation, utilities, attached structures) and the owners’ intent to keep the home in place may support a “fixture” argument in other contexts, but they do not displace a state statutory scheme that requires title-based perfection for this type of collateral.
- A future-advances clause in a recorded deed of trust may affect priority as to real-estate collateral, but it does not substitute for the perfection method that state law requires for a titled manufactured/mobile home.

## Conclusion

In the Matter of Bennett held that Nebraska’s certificate-of-title rules governed perfection and priority in the debtors’ manufactured home, so GreenPoint’s lien noted on the home’s certificate of title took priority over Gothenburg State Bank’s earlier recorded deed of trust on the land, despite the home’s permanent-style installation and the deed of trust’s fixture and future-advances language.


In the Matter of Bennett, 2002 Bankr. LEXIS 1793 (2002)