Fairfield Credit Corp. v. Donnelly
Connecticut Supreme Court
264 A.2d 547 (1969)
- Written by Jayme Weber, JD
Facts
John and Mary Donnelly (defendants) bought a color television from D.W.M. Advertising, Inc. (DWM) under an installment contract. The installment contract was financed by assigning it to the Fairfield Credit Corporation (Fairfield) (plaintiff) after the sale. The installment contract was written on a form Fairfield provided to DWM. The back of the form included fine print stating that the buyer: (1) would settle any disputes with the seller and (2) would not raise any buyer-seller issues as a defense against the installment contract’s assignee, Fairfield. DWM contacted Fairfield as soon as the Donnellys had signed the contract. Fairfield double-checked with the Donnellys that they had received the television and then accepted assignment of the installment contract from DWM. At the same time that the Donnellys signed the installment contract, DWM signed a service agreement stating that DWM would maintain the television for a year. Soon after the sale, the television needed multiple repairs from DWM. Within a few months, however, DWM completely disappeared. The Donnellys soon gave up trying to repair the television and stopped paying under the installment contract. Fairfield sued the Donnellys to recover the amount remaining on the contract.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (King, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.