Legal Opinion

Ungar Buick Co. to Use v. Thum

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 9, 1931No. Appeal 443PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldbige, J.,

This action in replevin was brought to recover a Buick automobile.

The appellees’ contention is that on January 25, 1926, the Freeport Flint Company, owned and operated by the defendant, Thum, and one, Wall, sold and delivered to Thum a certain Buick sedan. The appellant relies on a conditional sales contract to Thum, as vendee, dated February 1, 1926, which the Tingar Buick Company executed at Miami, Florida, covering a certain new Buick automobile, having the same motor and frame numbers, and of the same model, as the car which Thum alleged he had bought from the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Riccardi Mot. Car Co. Inc. v. WeinsteinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  2. Rockwood and Co. v. PuseySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Carroll v. GoddingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  2. Gensbigler v. ShawleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  3. Jackson v. GoodeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1946
  4. Gordon Gallagher v. Motors Fin. Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  5. Commonwealth v. CephasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1969

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API