Legal Opinion

Flatbush Auto Discount Corp. v. McCarthy-Bernhardt Buick, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 23, 1961Published

1Per curiam

The courts below have determined that a question of fact existed as to the nature of the transaction, involving a promissory note and chattel mortgage, and have resolved that question in favor of respondent, holding that the transaction was a direct loan to the buyer of an automobile. In our view, however, the undisputed evidence demonstrates as a matter of law that the transaction involved nothing more than a sale of an automobile on time by respondent to one Teresa Maesano, coupled with a prearranged sale by respondent to appellant of the Maesano note and chattel mortgage (cf. Brooks v.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Dunn v. Midland Loan Finance Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  2. Brooks v. . AveryNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
  3. Yeager v. AinsworthMississippi Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Jackson v. Westchester Auto Credit CorporationNew York Court of Appeals · 1944
  5. Jackson v. Westchester Auto Credit Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1944

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API