Legal Opinion · Dissent

Inland Finance Co. v. Inland Motor Car Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1923No. 17209Published

1DissentParker, J.

(dissenting) — I concur in the view that the judgment should be reversed,'but dissent from the vieWs of Judge Fullerton as to the ground he has rested the- reversal upon. I am of the opinion that the agreement between-appellant and the motor car company was in legal effect as between them a conditional sale contract;--and that, because of want of record thereof in the - auditor’s office of Taldma county,: it became an *307absolute sale as to tbe mortgage lien of respondent thereafter acquired, as long as that lien continued to be a valid and subsisting lien. However, as between appellant and the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Muller v. BardsharWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Turner v. CaldwellWashington Supreme Court · 1896

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

Powered by the Exa API