Russell v. Universal Acceptance Corporation
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
QUINN, Associate Judge:
Appellee instituted this action to recover the balance due on a promissory note executed by appellant for the purchase of a wig and services from Wigtyme, Inc. Appellant answered alleging that she was not indebted to appellee since there had been a failure of consideration. The trial court found, however, that appellee was a holder in due course and awarded judgment for the amount in default. Appellant challenges the decision of the court.
Appellant purchased the wig in March 1963. The price was $336 and included Wigtyme’s promise to provide forty-eight “servicings” over…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hill v. HawesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944
- James W. Beatty v. Franklin Investment Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1963
- Interstate Bankers Corp. v. KennedyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1943
- Millard v. Lorain Investment CorporationDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1962
- Implement Credit Corp. v. ElsingerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Smith v. Sherwood & Roberts, Spokane, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1968
- Fuller v. UNIVERSAL ACCEPTANCE CORPORATIONDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1970
- Smith v. Sherwood & Roberts, Spokane, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1968