Legal Opinion
Leedy v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided September 10, 1935No. 23461PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRiley, J.
Plaintiff in error, General Motors Acceptance Corporation of Amarillo. Tex., held by purchase and assignment an instrument styled a “Conditional Sale Contract.” It had been executed by plaintiff in error, Charles B. Leedy, purchaser of a Pontine automobile, and delivered to Roy Scliallenbarger, an automobile dealer of Shat-tuck, Okla. The instrument possessed many features of a chattel mortgage and it covered by its terms the automobile purchased and delivered to Leedy. The purpose of the instrument was to secure the deferred payments on the purchase' price of the automobile, and amongst…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wilson Motor Co. v. DunnSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Waggoner v. KoonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. Barney.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- First National Bank of Okarche v. TeatSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1896
- Lewis v. Valley Finance Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1929
3Cited by9 opinions
- Helfinstine v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1977
- Westerman v. Oregon Automobile Credit Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1942
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. VincentSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
- Malone v. DarrSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Muskogee v. WinterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.