Legal Opinion

Commercial Discount Co. v. Howard

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 2, 1930No. Docket No. 5897PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GATES, J., pro tem.

This action was tried upon an agreed statement of facts. The plaintiff and respondent is engaged in the business of handling automobile contracts— commercial paper. Appellants, who are dealers in automobiles, entered into five conditional sales contracts with various customers. For a valuable consideration they sold and transferred these contracts and the title thereof to the cars to respondent corporation. These transfers were evidenced by an assignment and agreement, to both of which we shall presently allude. The purchasers failed to make the payments called for by the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Parke & Lacy Co. v. White River Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Fowler v. HoffmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  3. Johnson v. KaeserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Elsom v. MooreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
  5. George J. Birkel Co. v. NastCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Board of County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. General Finance Co. v. PowellMontana Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Lyle v. Tri-County Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  4. Lyle v. TRI-COUNTY FED. S. & L. ASS'N.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  5. Opinion No., Texas Attorney General Reports1980

1 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