AutoXchange.com v. Dreyer and Reinbold, Inc.
Indiana Court of Appeals
816 N.E.2d 40 (2004)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
As the only corporate officer empowered to negotiate sales on behalf of AutoXchange.com, Inc. (AutoXchange) (plaintiff), Scott Ellington, AutoXchange’s minority shareholder, handled the sale of three cars to Dreyer & Reinbold, Inc. (defendant). Ellington instructed Dreyer & Reinbold to deliver the purchase money directly to Automotive Finance Corporation (AFC), AutoXchange’s creditor. In fact, this instruction was contrary to AutoXchange’s sole authorized procedure, by which Dreyer & Reinbold should have delivered the purchase money to AutoXchange. AutoXchange sued Dreyer & Reinbold for failing to act in good faith in following Ellington’s unauthorized instructions. The trial court denied AutoXchange’s motion to strike the court’s partial summary judgment for Dreyer & Reinbold. AutoXchange appealed to the Indiana Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Riley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
