GENERAL ACCEPTANCE CORP.
v.
A. A. AUTO SALES-RENTALS, INC. ET AL.
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.
General Acceptance Corporation appealed a final decree awarding damages to Nash Miami Motors, Inc. in a chattel mortgage foreclosure action. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment, finding that the chancellor properly followed the Court's prior decisions in this long-running dispute over the distribution of proceeds from the sale of automobiles.
The Court affirmed the chancellor's final judgment, finding that he made a studied effort to follow the Court's prior decisions and the Court's instructions in the matter.
“the law of the case was settled in cases (1) and (3) last cited. In fact, case (3) appears to conclude the questions raised in this case.”
Establishes that prior decisions had already determined the legal principles governing this dispute
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGeneral Acceptance Corporation filed a bill of complaint to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a flock of automobiles claimed by the defendants. A receiv…
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 Foreclosure Of Chattel Mortgage cases and more on FLexlaw
TERRELL, Justice.
Appellant as complainant filed bill of complaint to foreclose a chattel mortgage describing a flock of automobiles claimed by appellees as defendants. The sworn bill of complaint prayed for a receiver, which was granted. The receiver took 19 automobiles in custody. Defendants filed petition, seeking to have four of them released. The receiver then filed his report, admitting possession of all the automobiles, and advised the court that he had an offer to purchase them for $14,375. The chancellor authorized the receiver to accept the offer. Appellees were permitted to intervene for the purpose of establishing a lien on the funds in the hands of the receiver for the value of two of the automobiles alleged to be worth $1600. An order for partial distribution was entered whereby General Acceptance Corporation received $9000 from the receiver and the cause was referred to a Master who took testimony and made his report. Exceptions to the Master’s report were filed and overruled. On appeal by certiorari the exceptions were sustained.
When the cause was returned to the trial court, Special Master was appointed and like proceedings took place resulting in a judgment for appellee Nash Miami Motors, Inc., in the sum of $3894.92. The receiver was ordered to pay appellees $2436.17. On consideration petition for rehearing was denied; exceptions to the Master’s report were sustained, and final decree for the balance of the judgment was entered in favor of appellee, Nash Miami Motors, Inc. and against appellant, General Acceptance Corporation. We are confronted with an appeal from the latter decree. It will thus be observed that this is the fourth appearance of the case here. See (1) Nash Miami Motors, Inc., v. Bandel, 160 Fla. 925, 37 So. 2d 366; (2) 41 So. 2d 904; (3) 47 So. 2d 701 for previous appearances.
Several questions are urged for our consideration, but we do not think it necessary to explore them at this time because the law of the case was settled in cases (1) and (3) last cited. In fact, case (3)- appears to conclude the questions raised in this case. We have carefully considered the record and we think the chancellor made a studied effort to follow the decisions and the instructions of this Court, despite the implication that he failed to do so.
It is our conclusion that his judgment should be and is.hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
SEBRING, C. J., and ROBERTS, J., and WHITE, Associate Justice, concur. '
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Christ v. Dozier's, Inc., 101 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)…s hereby granted and the Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed in this cause be and the same is hereby dismissed. Gore v. Hanson, Fla., 59 So. 2d 538, 40 A.L.R.2d 1281; Brannon v. Johnston, Fla., 83 So. 2d 779; Wolf v. Industrial Supply Corp., Fla., 62 So. 2d 31.…
-
Christ v. Stathis, 101 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)…hereby granted and the Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed in this cause be and the same is hereby dismissed. Gore v. Hanson, Fla., 59 So. 2d 538, 40 A.L. R.2d 1281; Brannon v. Johnston, Fla., 83 So. 2d 779; Wolf v. Industrial Supply Corp., Fla., 62 So. 2d 31.…
-
Failla v. De Siervo, 101 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)…d the same is hereby granted and the appeal in this cause is hereby dismissed. Rule 4.2, Florida Appellate Rules; Gore v. Hanson, Fla., 59 So. 2d 538, 40 A.L.R.2d 1281; Brannon v. Johnston, Fla., 83 So. 2d 779; Wolf v. Industrial Supply Corp., Fla., 62 So. 2d 31.…
Authorities Cited
- Nash Miami Motors, Inc. v. Louie Bandel for the A. A. Auto Sales-Rentals, Inc., 160 Fla. 925 (Fla. 1948)
- Nash Miami Motors v. Bandel, 47 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 1950)