J. H. KAUFMAN
v.
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, A CORPORATION
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's judgment, holding that a seller who reserves title to property sold on credit can elect to sue for the full purchase price upon the buyer's default, but cannot pursue both that action and repossession of the property.
The court held that the note's negotiability and the acceleration clause were not the controlling issues. Instead, the established rule in Florida is that a seller who reserves title upon a credit sale may elect to sue for the full price upon default, but cannot pursue both that remedy and repossession of the property.
“The rule is settled in this State that when property is sold on a credit and title reserved by the vendor, upon breach of conditions of the sale, the vendor may treat the sale as absolute and sue for the price thereof or he may treat the sale as cancelled and recover the property but he will not be permitted to pursue both courses.”
This quote establishes the controlling legal principle regarding a seller's election of remedies in a credit sale with reserved title.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ. H. Kauffman executed a conditional sales note to Orange Belt Truck and Tractor Company, which was later assigned to International Harvester Company…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Acceleration Clause cases and more on FLexlaw
J. H. Kauffman executed his conditional sales note due in four installments to Orange Belt Truck and Tractor Company. Before any of the installments were due, the note was assigned to International Harvester Company. Kauffman failed to pay installments one and two when due so in March, 1942, the assignee of the note brought a common law action *189to recover the full amount of the note with interest and attorney’s fees. At the trial, the court instructed a verdict for the plaintiff, on which final judgment was entered and defendant appealed.
Two questions are urged: (1) Was the note negotiable, and (2) Were its terms such that its payment could be accelerated on default in taking up the first and second installments, the third and fourth installments not having matured?
The rule is settled in this State that when property is sold on a credit and title reserved by the vendor, upon breach of conditions of the sale, the vendor may treat the sale as absolute and sue for the price thereof or he may treat the sale as cancelled and recover the property but he will not be permitted to pursue both courses. American Process Co. v. Florida Press Brick Co. 56 Fla. 116, 47 So. 942; Central Farmers Trust Co. et al., v. McCampbell Furniture Stores, Inc., et al., 128 Fla. 60, 174 So. 748.
We think the last cited cases conclude the case at bar so the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
BUFORD, C. J., CHAPMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mandell v. Fortenberry, 290 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1974)…n Process Co. v. Florida White Pressed Brick Co. [56 Fla. 116], 47 So. 942 (Fla.1908); Helton v. Sinclair [93 Fla. 1121], 113 So. 568 (Fla.1927); Voges v. Ward [98 Fla. 304], 123 So. 785 (Fla.1929); Kaufman [Kauffman] v. International Harvester Co. [153 Fla. 188], 14 So. 2d 387 (Fla.1943); Baer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., [101 Fla. 913], 132 So. 817 (Fla.1931). By allowing the plaintiffs to exercise their full individual rights to possess the encumbered property that the debt was created to acquire…
-
Romanach v. A. J. Armstrong Co., Inc., 172 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 1965)…. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 109 So. 677; American Process Co. v. Florida White Pressed Brick Co., 56 Fla. 116, 47 So. 942; Helton v. Sinclair, 93 Fla. 1121, 113 So. 568; Voges v. Ward, 98 Fla. 304, 123 So. 785; Kaufman v. International Harvester Co., 153 Fla. 188, 14 So. 2d 387; Baer v. General Motors Acceptance Company, 101 Fla. 913, 132 So. 817; and Intertype Corporation v. Pulver, 101 Fla. 1180, 135 So. 793, relied upon by the petitioners, The testimony of the rpresenta-tive of the respondent was to the…
-
Cecil Holland Ford, Inc. v. Jameson, 132 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)…eral Motors Acceptance Corp., 101 Fla. 913, 132 So. 817; Commercial Credit Co. v. Miller, 111 Fla. 554, 149 So. 482; Central Farmers’ Trust Co. v. McCampbell Furniture Stores, Inc., 128 Fla. 60, 174 So. 748'; Kauffman v. International Harvester Co., 153 Fla. 188, 14 So. 2d 387. The appellant, having first sought recovery of the sales price, treated the sale as absolute and would not thereafter be permitted to retake possession. Where, as here, the automobile has not been redelivered to the appellee upon fo…
Authorities Cited
- Am. Process Co. v. Fla. White Pressed Brick Co., 56 Fla. 116 (Fla. 1908)
- Cent. Farmers Tr. Co. v. McCampbell Furniture Stores, Inc., 128 Fla. 60 (Fla. 1937)