law
nikytylMack, a dealer, sold Hudgens, a used car on credit. At the time of the sale, Mach fraudulently informed Hudgens that the car was in good condition: in fact, the car needed extensive repairs. When Hudgens attempted to return the car to Mack within the thirty-day guarantee period, Mach refused to take the car back. In the meantime, Mack had assigned Hudgen’s contract to Universal CIT Credit Corp. When Hudgens refused to pay on the contract, Universal CIT sued him. Hudgens defense was that he had the right to set aside the contract based on fraud. Was Hudgens correct? (Universal CIT Credit Corporation vs Hudgens, 356 S.W.2d 658)
Respond in 200-400 words
11 years ago
10
Answer(0)
Bids(0)
other Questions(10)
- A+ Answers of the following Questions
- HISTORY 7
- MAT-115A PROBLEM SET 9
- A+ Answers of the following Questions
- What evidence is presented that shows effort was made to understand the management dilemma? Identify and classify all of the variables in the U.S. Army's dud shell research. What was Myra's hypothesis for the U.S. Army's dud shell research? What was the U
- Baber Makayla
- Pacific Northern Corp
- Production Planning and Quality Management
- for Dermico only.
- test unit 7
