Legal Opinion

Kliks v. McCaffrey and Bettis

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1960PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolman, J.

(Pro Tempore)

This is an action brought by the plaintiff Ediks against the defendants McCaffrey and Bettis. Mc-Caffrey was a second-hand automobile dealer and as such was required to be bonded under OB.S 481.310. Bettis was his bondsman. McCaffrey contacted plaintiff early one morning and told him he had an opportunity to make a good buy on two specific automobiles if he could get sufficient money to make the deal. He asked to borrow $3,000 from plaintiff for that purpose and promised to deliver to the plaintiff the certificates of title as security later in the day. He signed a note for…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Butte Motor Co. v. StrandOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  2. South Seattle Auto Auction Inc. v. Western Casualty & Surety Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  3. Gearhart v. Pierce Enterprises, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Man-Data, Inc. v. B & a AUTOMOTIVE, INC.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. Gearhart v. Pierce Enterprises, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API