Legal Opinion
Hill v. Dominquez
Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California
Decided December 13, 1955No. Civ. A. No. 8793PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPatrosso, J.
Plaintiff, as assignee of H. J. Caruso, Incorporated, instituted this action to recover the balance alleged to be due upon a conditional sales contract for the purchase of an automobile, following a resale of the vehicle after its repossession by the vendor for default of the defendant purchaser. The defendant filed an answer, putting in issue the material allegations of the complaint and in addition thereto filed a cross-complaint to recover the money paid under the contract upon the ground that the same did not comply with the requirements of Civil Code, section 2982. (See Carter v.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Carter v. Seaboard Finance Co.California Supreme Court · 1949
- Brewer v. Universal Credit Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1940
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. DickinsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933
- Motor Contract Company v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Swift Dodge v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- CIT Corporation v. HessIdaho Supreme Court · 1964
- Leslie Leasing Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1983
- Ekman v. Mountain Motors, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1961
- McMillen v. PippinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.