Zmak

Zmak v. Arata Pontiac

Good Law
1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 1665·265 Cal. App. 2d 689·71 Cal. Rptr. 506
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 16, 1968Civ. No. 24409California1,205 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Agee, J.

Defendants appeal from a judgment rescinding a conditional automobile sales contract between plaintiffs who are husband and wife, and defendant Arata Pontiac. Defendant Bank of America was the assignee of said contract. Defendants Goodsell and Ellis were employees of defendant Arata Pontiac, a Pontiac dealer.

The sole issue on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support certain findings of fact made by the trial court. These findings are that (1) the trade-in value of respondents’ car was agreed to be $1,150, instead of $200 as appellants contend; (2) that when the automobile purchased by respondents was delivered to them, they were not furnished with a copy of the contract, as required by Civil Code section 2982; (3) that respondents were induced to sign said contract in blank and that appellants (except Bank of America) made false and fraudulent representations to them.

The facts are stated in the light most favorable to respondents, as an appellate court is required to do. (4 Cal.Jur.2d, 449, et seq.)

Facts: On February 1, 1964, respondents drove to Arata Pontiac and were shown a 1964 Pontiac by appellant Ellis, a salesman. It was priced at $3,661.16. The trade-in…

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.