Legal Opinion · Dissent

Automobile Acceptance Corp. v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided March 13, 1958No. [No. 124, September Term, 1957.]Published

1Dissent

Hammond, J.,'

filed the following dissenting opinion, in which Henderson, J., concurred.

To me the statute that deals with the recording of conditional sales contracts is not applicable, or certainly not controlling, in this case for two simple and fundamental reasons.

First, the statute’s design is to protect only those of the classes of third persons expressly therein designated who may subsequently deal with the chattel sold in reliance on the possession of the buyer, without notice that it has not been paid for, and who would be hurt save for the statute. Automobile Acceptance, the second…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. C. I. T. Corp. v. GuySupreme Court of Virginia · 1938
  2. In Re Lake's Laundry, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
  3. Winton Motor Carriage Co. v. Broadway Automobile Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Thomas Roberts & Co. v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1922
  5. Lynn Morris Plan Co. v. GordonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API