Legal Opinion
Brooks v. Auto Wholesalers, Inc.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided December 4, 1953No. 1393PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAYTON, Chief Judge.
Auto Wholesalers sold a used automobile to Brooks, and took from him a conditional sale agreement and a promissory note covering the deferred purchase price. These instruments were negotiated to Consolidated Auto Investment Corp. Thereafter Brooks sued Auto Wholesalers and Consolidated to have both instruments declared void and for tire return of the money he had paid in the transaction. He also demanded reimbursement for monies he had spent in repairing the automobile. He charged fraud, breach of warranty, and usury. The trial court found against him on all issues and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hare v. General Contract Purchase Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
- Commercial Credit Co. v. TarwaterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- District of Columbia v. Hamilton Nat. Bank of WashingtonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1950
- Bell v. Idaho Finance Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1953
- Harper v. FutrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United Securities Corporation v. FranklinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1962
- James W. Beatty v. Franklin Investment Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1963
- Bettum v. Montgomery Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1971
- Morris v. Capitol Furniture & Appliance Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Millard v. Lorain Investment CorporationDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.