Demitro v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the plaintiff stated a claim for unfair practices under the ICFA where the defendant allegedly repossessed a vehicle by mistake but refused to return it until the plaintiff paid his outstanding balance
• action was “not a simple breach of contract” where plaintiff alleged oppressive conduct that “sufficiently implicated consumer protection concerns”
• defendant forced plaintiff to either pay off entire outstanding balance on installment contract or have car repossessed; plaintiff suffered substantial injury because his credit rating was damaged and he lost his vehicle
• “In this case, plaintiff alleges that GMAC's conduct in retaining possession of the wrongfully repossessed vehicle until after he paid off the entire outstanding balance ... in contravention of the terms set forth in GMAC’s seven-day extension letter, amounted to oppressive conduct.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).