Zmak v. Arata Pontiac

AGEE, J. Defendants appeal from a judgment rescinding a conditional automobile sales contract between plaintiffs who are husband and wife, and defendant Arata Pontiac. Defendant Bank of America was the assignee of said contract. Defendants Goodsell and Ellis were employees of defendant Arata Pontiac, a Pontiac dealer.

The sole issue on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support certain findings of fact made by the trial court. These findings are that (1) the trade-in value of respondents’ car was agreed to be $1,150, instead of $200 as appellants contend; (2) that when the automobile purchased by respondents was delivered to them, they were not furnished with a copy of the contract, as required by Civil Code section 2982; (3) that respondents were induced to sign said contract in blank and that appellants (except Bank of America) made false and fraudulent representations to them.

The facts are stated in the light most favorable to respondents, as an appellate court is required to do. (4 Cal.Jur.2d, 449, et seq.)

Facts: On February 1, 1964, respondents drove to Arata Pontiac and were shown a 1964 Pontiac by appellant Ellis, a salesman. It was priced at $3,661.16. The trade-in allowance for respondents’ 1957 Pontiac was discussed. Its engine had recently had a major engine overhaul and the car was in excellent condition.

Ellis made an initial trade-in offer of $975. Respondent husband made a counteroffer of $2,500 plus a trade-in allowance of $1,161.16. Ellis then went into one of the offices off the showroom, stating that he would have to discuss the matter with a superior. Upon his return, he told the respondents, "Well, we have got your offer of eleven sixty-one. ’ ’

Ellis began working out the agreement on a preliminary form. Respondents were shortly turned over to appellant Goodsell, assistant sales manager, who completed the preliminary paper work. In response to respondent husband’s question, Goodsell confirmed the allowance of $1,161.16 on the trade-in.

Goodsell informed respondents that a $300 downpayment was necessary and respondent husband signed a check for this amount.

[691]Goodsell then requested respondents to sign various agreement forms in blank, explaining that it was almost closing time and it would be necessary for respondents to go home to get the “pink slip” for the trade-in car. He assured respondents that the forms would be completed by the time they returned and they would then be given a copy of the agreement. Accordingly, respondents signed the forms in blank and went home for the pink slip.