Legal Opinion

Fink v. Stallings 601 Sales, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 18, 1983No. 8219DC1165PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

Defendant Citicorp contends it is a “purchaser” under G.S. 20-288(e) and thereby entitled to indemnity from North River Insurance Company, the surety on Stallings’ motor vehicle dealer’s bond, for recovery of the $11,245.50 balance due from Stallings on the 1979 Honey motor home.

The statute in question provides in part:

Any purchaser of a motor vehicle who shall have suffered any loss or damage by any act of a motor vehicle dealer that constitutes a violation of this Article shall have the right to institute an action to recover against such motor vehicle dealer and the surety.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lafayette Transportation Service, Inc. v. County of RobesonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  2. Triplett v. JamesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Triplett v. JamesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ferris v. HaymoreCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1992
  2. Taylor v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  3. Alfred J. Ferris v. Dean Haymore Lucille Inman, Western Surety Company, & Third Party and Carl Edward Simmons, D/B/A Simmons Auto Sales, Individually Clarence B. Inman, "Bill," T/a Inman Motors Myrtle Inman Dorothy M. Simmons, Alfred J. Ferris v. Western Surety Company, & Third Party and Dean Haymore Lucille Inman Carl Edward Simmons, D/B/A Simmons Auto Sales, Individually Clarence B. Inman, "Bill," T/a Inman Motors Myrtle Inman v. Dorothy M. Simmons, Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
  4. Perkins v. HelmsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API