Legal Opinion

Garrett v. Neitzel

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1930No. 5309PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLee, J.

— -Action in replevin to recover possession of an automobile alleged to have been wrongfully repossessed by defendant vendors. The defendants, H. R. Neitzel, Francis H. Neitzel and John M. Neitzel, were Chrysler dealers at Boise under the firm name and style of Bannock Motor Sales Co. Mrs. F. O. Garrett, plaintiff, charged in her complaint that, on or about September 5, 1926, she purchased of the company the automobile involved here, believing the same to be a new car as represented by the vendors, whereas, in fact, it was a second-hand car that had originally been sold one H. D. Park, and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bone v. HayesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Rankin v. CaldwellIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Bean v. BickleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
  4. Wicklund v. AllraumWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Sell v. Mississippi River Logging Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1894

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Smith v. Big Lost River Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Klam v. KoppelIdaho Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Riley v. LarsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Bratton v. SliningerIdaho Supreme Court · 1969

12 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