Legal Opinion

Brown v. Suburban Cadillac, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 5, 1971No. [No. 195, September Term, 1970.]PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFinan, J.

Prior to the litigation which gave rise to this appeal, the appellant (Brown) was employed by the appellee (Suburban Cadillac) as an automobile salesman, and pursuant to his employment was given an opportunity to purchase an automobile from the company at $300 above the company’s cost. Brown purchased a 1970 Cadillac on or about September 26, 1969, pursuant to a “Salesman Demonstrator Plan.” This plan was in contract form and was executed by Brown. Under the terms of this agree ment the company had the right to repurchase the automobile “at any time.” If the automobile was financed, title to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Strickler Engineering Corp. v. Seminar, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
  2. Fenwick Motor Co. v. FenwickCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970
  3. Liberto v. HolfeldtCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959
  4. Tellez v. Canton Railroad Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  5. Glass v. Doctors Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1957

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. Beatty v. Trailmaster Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  2. Impala Platinum Ltd. v. Impala Sales (U.S.A.), Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  3. Hill v. Cross Country Settlement, LLCCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. Salisbury Beauty Schools v. State Board of CosmetologistsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
  5. Lynx, Inc. v. Ordnance Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1974

39 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