Was Northeastern lying,  had it simply forgotten that the aircraft engine was subject to a security interest in favor of ATASCO, or did it not mean by its language in the bill of sale to warrant against the existence of a security interest?

    The opinion later concludes that Braniff's interest is superior to that of ATASCO. Had Braniff's interest been subordinate, it would have been liable to ATASCO for conversion. In that case, the representation in the bill of sale, an express warranty of good title, might have given Braniff a claim for breach of express warranty against Northeastern. But in any event, Braniff would have a claim against Northeastern for breach of implied warranty under Commercial Code 2-312(1)(b) (implied warranty that goods delivered shall be free from any security interest of which the buyer at the time of contgracting has no knowledge).  Braniff's breach of warranty claim would be unsecured.  Northeastern is in bankruptcy.  How useful would the the claim be to Braniff?