Legal Opinion
Chrysler Corp. v. Adamatic, Inc.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided June 18, 1973No. 336PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.
It should be emphasized that the cause of action is for replevin. The action was brought by Chrysler to gain possession of the machines and for damages against Lakeshore for their wrongful detention. Although there is evidence in the record indicating a breach of contract by the manufacturer, Adamatic, no relief is sought for that. Lakeshore, on the other hand, asserts ownership of the machines because of its prior perfected security agreement with Adamatic. The receiver, representing the general creditors, bases its claim upon Lakeshore’s rights as a secured creditor, but in addition asks…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Security Pacific National Bank v. GoodmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Thorp Credit, Inc. v. BarrSupreme Court of Iowa · 1972
- Marine Mart, Inc. v. PearceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- Columbia International Corp. v. KemplerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- In the Matter of Gary Aircraft Corporation, Debtor. Gary Aircraft Corporation v. General Dynamics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
- Dr. E.G. Fischer v. Bar Harbor Banking and Trust CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Ray Rohweder v. Aberdeen Production Credit AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
- Kinetics Technology International Corporation, a Delaware Corporation v. The Fourth National Bank of Tulsa, a National Banking AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1983
- Pacific Products, Inc. v. Great Western Plywood, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1975
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.