Legal Opinion · Dissent

Keeling v. Ford Motor Credit Co.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 8, 1988No. 151, September Term, 1987Published

1DissentEldridge, Judge

The majority, concluding that the lease in this case is not governed by the Retail Installment Sales Act (RISA), Maryland Code (1975, 1983 Repl.Vol.), Title 12, Subtitle 6 of the Commercial Law Article, upholds the decisions below in favor of the Respondent Ford Motor Credit Company. Because I believe that the lease is clearly governed by the terms of RISA, I dissent.

I

Ford Motor Credit Company claims that the lease was not subject to the notice requirements in § 12-624(d) of RISA because it was not an “installment sales agreement.” § 12-601(Z )(2)(iii) of RISA defines an installment sales…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Kaczorowski v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  2. Tucker v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
  3. Board of Educ., Mont. Co. v. PaynterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  4. United States Leasing Corp. v. Franklin Plaza Apartments, Inc.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1971
  5. Beckwith MacHinery Co. v. MatthewsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1948

6 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