Legal Opinion

Monroe Automobile & Supply Co. v. Oakley

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided January 14, 1932No. 3658Published

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

The plaintiff brings this suit agaipst P. M. Oakley, the Rogers Service Station, a pari> nership, and the individual members of the partnership D. A. Woodard and G. A. Rogers, to recover $135.36, the balance alleged to be due for merchandise sold by plaintiff to P. M. Oakley.

It is alleged that the defendant P. M. Oakley sold his stock of goods, wares, and merchandise in bulk and out of the ordinary course of business without complying with Act No. 270 of 1926, known as the “Bulk Sales Law.” Rogers Service Station is sought to be held liable as the purchaser of said stock of goods.

The…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Schwartz v. LakeSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1903
  2. Adams v. Citizens' BankLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1931
  3. Kelly Springfield Tire Co. v. OakleyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API