Reo Motorcar Co. v. Barnes

On Motion of Defendant in Error for Rehearing.

In the opinion disposing of the appeal it was stated that according to Barnes’ contention he was to execute other notes to take the place of those aggregating $660 representing a part of the purchase price of the Reo automobile purchased by him of the car company April 26, 1924, and was to secure the new notes by a mortgage on the Reo automobile he claimed he afterwards purchased of the car company. As pointed out' in the motion, the statement was incorrect so far as it was that Barnes was to execute other notes in lieu of those he had already…