Honnold

On November 10, 1926, Walter L. Clapham, the legal owner of a Chrysler sedan, sold it to F. W. Stock-dale under a conditional sales contract, which reserved the title in the seller, and provided, among other things, that should the buyer fail or neglect to comply with the terms of the contract, or fail to make the deferred payments according to the terms thereof, the seller might exercise his option of declaring the unpaid portion of the purchase price due and payable, and bring suit therefor, or might, without notice, declare the buyer’s rights under the contract terminated and immediately repossess the car. The buyer defaulted in his payment falling due on February 10, 1927, and on all payments thereafter, leaving an unpaid balance of the purchase price due respondent in the sum of $1201.60, no part of which was paid by the buyer or his assignees. On November 24, 1926, Walter L. Clapham, for a valuable consideration, assigned the conditional sales contract to respondent, together with the legal title to the car. On March 3, 1927, Stockdale assigned his interest in the automobile to James Hollis. On May 2, 1927, both Stockdale and Hollis assigned their interests in the car to…

I dissent.

The defendant held the legal title to the ear, which had been sold under a conditional sales contract giving the seller his option, in case of default in mailing installment payments, either to declare the whole balance due and bring an action for its recovery, or to repossess the car.

Stockdale, the original contract purchaser, transferred possession of the car to one Hollis and assigned to him his interest in the contract of purchase. Thereafter, default having been made in several installment payments, the defendant here exercised its option under the contract and brought an action for the full amount of the balance of purchase price. After the action was brought defendant made demand upon Hollis for possession of the ear and he, having no knowledge that action had been brought, and not being then advised of it, turned the car over to this defendant.

Afterward Stockdale and Hollis each transferred whatever interest either had in the car to the plaintiffs here, who made demand upon the defendant for the car, which was refused.

It is conceded that, under the decisions in this state, when the legal owner of personal property which is the subject of conditional sale…