Heywood Boot & Shoe Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Rev.

PHILLIPS, McDERMOTT, BRATTON, BRATTON, alleged an action paid. exacted Plain- usurious tiff was Plymouth dealer DeSoto and Tulsa, purchased automobiles at Okl. automobiles manufacturer in new Detroit, Mich., at wholesale cash and adjacent sold them at retail Tulsa and territory. obligated Ply- purchase tract DeSoto and 200 automobiles mouth of its sales at retail were Mo'st cash, part part payments, deferred taken in trade. That meth- used automobile purchase and sale necessitated more od plaintiff had available and re- cash quired it borrow substantial sums from engaged time to time. Defendant was financing dealers auto- branch and maintained a office at mobiles parties entered into two con- Tulsa. writing dated March tracts first, “Application denominated by plaintiff accept- signed Floor Plan” defendant, following contained the ed provisions: application priv- hereby make “We storing cars ilege of under C. I. T. Floor

Case Details

Case Name: Heywood Boot & Shoe Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Rev.

Court Name: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Date Published: Apr 1, 1935

Citation: 76 F.2d 586

Docket Number: 2965

Court Abbreviation: 1st Cir.