Short answer. No. Article 1529 expressly states that an unpaid seller with a lien on the goods does not lose that lien by reason only of having obtained a judgment or decree for the price. Getting a money judgment against the buyer preserves your lien rather than replacing it.
What the law says
The unpaid seller of goods, having a lien thereon, does not lose his lien by reason only that he has obtained judgment or decree for the price of the goods.
Civil Code, Article 1529 — Loss of the Lien. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The unpaid seller of goods loses his lien thereon: (1) When he delivers the goods to a carrier or other bailee for the purpose of transmission to the buyer without reserving the ownership in the goods or the right to the possession thereof; (2) When the buyer or his agent lawfully obtains possession of the goods; (3) By waiver thereof.
Civil Code, Article 1529 — Loss of the Lien. Read the full provision →
The article settles this exact question directly
Article 1529 addresses your situation in its own final sentence, separately from the list of ways a lien is actually lost. The unpaid seller of goods, having a lien thereon, does not lose his lien by reason only that he has obtained judgment or decree for the price of the goods. Pursuing and winning a money judgment against the buyer for the unpaid price is not, on its own, one of the events that terminates your lien on the goods.
Only three specific events actually end the lien
The article lists a closed set of ways the lien is lost: the unpaid seller of goods loses his lien thereon: (1) When he delivers the goods to a carrier or other bailee for the purpose of transmission to the buyer without reserving the ownership in the goods or the right to the possession thereof; (2) When the buyer or his agent lawfully obtains possession of the goods; (3) By waiver thereof. Obtaining a judgment for the price appears nowhere on this list, which is precisely why the article needed its own separate sentence to confirm that a judgment does not silently create a fourth, unlisted way to lose the lien.
Why the two remedies are treated as separate
A money judgment for the price and the lien on the goods serve different purposes: the judgment gives you a legal claim you can enforce against the buyer's assets generally, while the lien gives you a specific claim against the goods themselves while you retain possession or the right to it. The statute keeps these remedies independent so that pursuing one does not automatically extinguish the other — you are not forced to choose between suing for the price and preserving your hold on the goods.
What this means for your lien going forward
Having obtained your judgment, your lien on the goods remains intact unless one of the three listed events actually occurs — delivering the goods onward without reserving your rights, the buyer lawfully obtaining possession, or your own waiver. If none of those has happened, the judgment you already secured for the price does not, by itself, require you to release your hold on the goods.