Pierce

Pacific Finance & Investment Co. v. Pierce

Good Law
1920 Cal. App. LEXIS 293·48 Cal. App. 600·291 P. 1115
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 21, 1920Civ. No. 3429.California1,596 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Waste, J.

The plaintiff, claiming the right to do so, under the provisions of a contract of purchase and sale, took possession of a certain automobile, and brought this action against the defendants, seeking to be subrogated to the right of the defendant Pierce to perform a contract, entered into between the Greer-Bobbins Co. and Pierce, to purchase the car. Judgment was for the defendants, and confirmed the right of possession of the automobile to the Greer-Robbins Company. Plaintiff appealed.

The plaintiff is a corporation engaged in the business of financing automobile and other contracts for commodities sold on the installment plan. The defendant Greer-Robbins Company, engaged in the business of selling automobiles, had sold the automobile in question to Frank H. Wells, one of its salesmen. Wells, as o.wner, then entered into a contract with the plaintiff, under the terms of which he sold the ear to it upon the installment plan for the sum of $1100.00. As a matter of fact, the real purchaser from Wells was the defendant Harley Pierce, the plaintiff merely financing the purchase for him. Wells then assigned the contract to the defendant Greer-Robbins Company. Defendant Pierce, in order…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.