Gentry

Gentry v. Kelley Kar Co.

Good Law
14 Cal. Rptr. 121·193 Cal. App. 2d 324·1961 Cal. App. LEXIS 1707
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 26, 1961Civ. No. 24920California5,146 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wood, J.

Plaintiffs Eugene and Ruth Gentry sought (1) damages for fraud in inducing them to execute a lease of an automobile, (2) damages for violation of section 2982, subdivision (a), of the Civil Code (failure to recite certain items in a conditional sale contract of an automobile, and failure to deliver a copy of the contract at the time of its execution), and (3) damages for a violation of section 2982, subdivision (c), of the Civil Code (limiting the amount of the time price differential under a conditional sale contract of an automobile). They also sought (1) to cancel the lease and a chattel mortgage and (2) to quiet title to the automobile and to the furniture referred to in the mortgage.

Plaintiffs George and Jessie Gentry (parents of Eugene Gentry) sought (1) to cancel a trust deed (executed by them as security for the lease) on the ground of fraud in inducing them to execute the deed; and (2) to quiet title to the property referred to in the deed.

*326 Defendant, in its answer, denied the allegations regarding fraud and violations of the code sections, and they alleged that the causes of action were barred by section 340, subdivision 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure. In a…

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.