PARRISH v. BOB KEEFER PLYMOUTH INC (1962)

Supreme Court of California, In Bank.

Edward PARRISH, etc., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. BOB KEEFER PLYMOUTH, INC., Defendant and Appellant.

L. A. 26299.

Decided: June 21, 1962

Thorpe, Sullivan, Clinnin & Workman and John G. Thorpe, Los Angeles, for defendant and appellant. Eldon J. Koorstad, Downey, for plaintiffs and respondents.

Defendant appeals from a judgment for plaintiffs in an action to declare unenforcible a conditional sale contract for the sale of an automobile and to recover the amount of plaintiffs' down payment on such automobile.

The trial court based its judgment upon the following conclusion of law: ‘That the Conditional Sales Contract * * * violated the provisions of (now former) Civil Code Section 2982(a) 5, in that the description, ‘License and Registration $27.00’ is not a sufficient compliance with the provisions of that section.'

Such conclusion is untenable. The quoted language constitutes full compliance with the subject section. (See Stasher v. Harger-Haldeman, Cal., 22 Cal.Rptr. 657, 372 P.2d 649.)

The judgment is reversed.

SCHAUER, Justice.

GIBSON, C. J., and TRAYNOR, McCOMB, PETERS, WHITE, and DOOLING, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law