Legal Opinion

Murray v. Federal Motor Truck Sales Corp.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 1929PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant sold a truck to the complainant, part of the purchase price being paid in a cash equivalent, and for the balance of the purchase price notes were given and title was retained to secure the payment of said notes.

An insurance policy was taken out protecting the interests of both vendor and vendee in the truck. While in use by the vendee the truck was seriously damaged in an accident and it was brought to the vendor's place for repairs. Insurance was collected covering the amount of the estimated damages to the vehicle and the vendor appropriated this insurance and applied it on…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Southern Ice & Coal Co. v. AlleyTennessee Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Cowan v. Singer Manufacturing Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Russell v. Clinton Motor Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Lieberman v. PuckettTennessee Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Whitelaw Furniture Co. v. BoonTennessee Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Barger v. WebbTennessee Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Lyons v. Jahncke Service, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Mitchell v. Automobile Sales Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Rice v. Lusky Furniture Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Breeden v. Elliott Bros.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1938

18 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