Legal Opinion

C.I.T. Corporation v. Jorgensen

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1932No. File No. 7298PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRudolph, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover possession of a certain automobile. The facts are agreed to by stipulation of the parties. The defendants Tolmacks purchased the automobile in controversy from the Hudson Motor Company. Title to the automobile was reserved in the Hudson Motor Company bv means of a conditional sales contract. The sale was conducted and consummated in the state of Indiana, and the car was kept in Indiana after the sale. The Hudson Motor Company assigned the conditional sales contract to plaintiff. The laws of the state of Indiana do not require the filing of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Baldwin v. HillCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1896
  2. Willys-Overland Co. v. EvansSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919
  3. Cherry's Incorporated v. SharpensteenArizona Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. First National Bank v. PetersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API