Baldazo v. Villa Oldsmobile, Inc.
Texas Court of Appeals
695 S.W.2d 815 (1985)
- Written by Douglas Halasz, JD
Facts
Guadalupe Baldazo (plaintiff) bought a car from Villa Oldsmobile, Inc. (Villa Olds) (defendant). Baldazo signed a promissory note in which he agreed to pay for the car in 48 monthly installments and gave Villa Olds a security interest in the car. Baldazo also gave Villa Olds the option to accelerate the debt if Baldazo defaulted on the note. Villa Olds assigned the note to General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC). After approximately one year, Baldazo lost his job and could not pay the monthly installments. Accordingly, Baldazo voluntarily surrendered the car to GMAC. GMAC took the car to Villa Olds’s premises and sent Baldazo a letter. In the letter, GMAC informed Baldazo that it planned to sell the car if Baldazo did not pay the delinquent installments plus expenses by a certain date. GMAC also informed Baldazo that if the car sold for less than the remaining debt, then Baldazo would still owe the amount unpaid. GMAC reassigned the note to Villa Olds. Baldazo did not pay the amounts required to get the car back. Therefore, Villa Olds sold the car and received approximately $4,000.00 less than Baldazo’s debt. Villa Olds then sued Baldazo to recover the remaining debt plus interest, attorney’s fees, and costs. The trial court ruled in Villa Olds’s favor. Baldazo appealed and argued that he never received an acceleration notice.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Countiss, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.