California Court of Appeal

In an action involving breach of contract and fraud claims, trial court's judgment in favor of plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) the court properly instructed the jury that plaintiff's interest in his consigned vehicles was superior to that of defendant-secured creditor if the secured creditor had actual knowledge that the used car retailer was substantially engaging in selling vehicles that belonged to others; 2) there is substantial evidence the secured creditor had such knowledge; 3) the court properly instructed the jury on the definition of possession, and there is substantial evidence to support the jury's finding plaintiff had possession of the vehicles; and 4) whether the court erred in granting a directed verdict on plaintiff's fraud and breach of contract claims need not be addressed as the jury's verdict in favor of the plaintiff is upheld.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/07/2009
• Published 10/07/2009

Judges

• NARES, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Law Offices of Paul D. Turner & Associates, Paul D. Turner, Law Offices of Zvi “Hershy” Silver and Zvi Aria Silver for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Prenovost, Normandin, Bergh and Dawe, Tom R. Normandin, Jr., and Paula M. Harrelson for Defendant and Appellant.