CNRS & Z, Inc. v. Medious
| Docket Number: | 2008-CA-01925-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-08-2009 Opinion Author: KING, C.J. Holding: AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Breach of contract Judge(s) Concurring: LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND MAXWELL, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): CARLTON, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-24-2008 Appealed from: MARION COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Prentiss Harrell Disposition: JUDGMENT FOR APPELLEE Case Number: 2008-215H |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | CNRS & Z, INC. D/B/A NU-2-U AUTO SALES |
ALEXANDER IGNATIEV |
|
|
| Appellee: | RANDY MEDIOUS | RANDY MEDIOUS (PRO SE) |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Contract - Breach of contract |
| Summary of the Facts: | CNRS & Z, Incorporated, doing business as Nu-2-U Auto Sales, filed an action for replevin against Randy Medious. CNRS & Z alleged that Medious was unable to obtain financing for a vehicle that he had purchased from the car dealership and demanded its return. The trial court found in favor of Medious, finding that CNRS & Z breached the retail installment contract and that CNRS & Z was responsible for the lien on Medious’s trade-in vehicle. CNRS & Z appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | CNRS & Z argues that Medious breached the retail installment contract because he failed to obtain financing to purchase the Impala; he failed to make his car payments; and he allowed his trade-in vehicle to be repossessed. There is no language in the retail installment contract between CNRS & Z and Medious that suggests that the sale of the vehicle was contingent upon Medious obtaining financing from a third party. CNRS & Z argues that it was not required to finance the purchase for Medious. CNRS & Z also argues that the sale was not complete because it did not transfer the title to the Impala to Medious. However, the contract is clear and unambiguous. If the sale of the Impala was contingent upon Medious obtaining third party financing, CNRS & Z should have used language in the contract to express so. No such language was included in the contract. The retail installment contract was between CNRS & Z and Medious. The contract clearly stated that Medious agreed to buy the Impala from CNRS & Z on credit, and he promised to pay CNRS & Z all amounts due under the contract. CNRS & Z attempted to assign its interest in the contract to Credit Acceptance and did so unsuccessfully. Thus, the trial court did not err by finding that the transaction between Medious and CNRS & Z was a legally binding sale. The terms of the contract called for Medious to trade in his Buick and to make monthly payments to CNRS & Z in order to receive the Impala. Despite CNRS & Z’s attempt to reject the delivery of Medious’s trade-in vehicle and to refuse acceptance of Medious’s payments, Medious completed his obligations under the contract. Thus, the trial court did not err by finding that CNRS & Z had breached the contract. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
