Legal Opinion

Ohio Motors, Inc. v. Russell Willis, Inc.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided March 7, 1952PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gailoe

The only question presented by the appeal is whether the complainant, Ohio Motors, Inc., or the defendant, Russell Willis, Inc., owns and is entitled to possession of a Pontiac automobile of the value of $1,875, which was transferred from the Ohio Company to the Nashville Company, under the following admitted facts: On March 23, 1948, one C. B. Pruitt went to the place of business of the Ohio Company in Columbus, Ohio, and offered to buy the Pontiac automobile for $1,875 cash. Pruitt gave a check on a Florida bank in the amount of $1,875 in payment for the automobile. Complainant refused to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Young v. Harris-Cortner Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Jackson v. WallerTennessee Supreme Court · 1950

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mori v. Chicago National BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1954
  2. Handley Motor Co. v. WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Edwards v. Central Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1954
  4. Handley Motor Co. v. WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. I-Land Auto Sales, Inc. v. ValleCity of New York Municipal Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API