Legal Opinion
Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Russell
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 19, 1994No. CX-93-2581PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
Appellants Dawn Russell and David Russell challenge entry of summary judgment in favor of respondents Ford Motor Credit Company and Monticello Ford and Mercury, Inc. on appellants’ claims for breach of contract, violation of the Minnesota Motor Vehicle Retail Installment Sales Act, the Federal Truth in Lending Act, and the Federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act. Because we find that the automobile advertisement did not constitute an offer to the general public, and that Ford Credit complied with the various Acts in question and resold the automobile in a commercially…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Betlach v. Wayzata CondominiumSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Grondahl v. BulluckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Parks Chevrolet, Inc. v. WatkinsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Gaynor v. Union Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hawaii Community Federal Credit Union v. KekaHawaii Supreme Court · 2000
- Zanakis-Pico v. Cutter Dodge, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2002
- William Ballou v. Asset Marketing Services, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2022
- Doe 175 ex rel. Doe 175 v. Columbia Heights School District, ISD No. 13Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. HarrisMissouri Court of Appeals · 2012
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.