Wesley v. Schaller Subaru, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that trial court’s agency determination was clearly erroneous and directing judgment consistent with lack of agency relationship
• holding that an agency relationship did not exist between a car dealership and a financing company because the financing company “does not control the actual negotiation of the initial transaction” between the dealership and its customers
• indicating that whether judgment has been rendered depends on pronouncement of court in memorandum of decision rather than clerical rendition of court's decision in judgment file
• indicating that whether judgment has been rendered depends on pronouncement of court in memorandum of decision rather than clerical rendition of court’s decision in judgment file
• judgment of trial court reversed on basis of court’s “definite and firm conviction that a mistake was committed”
• \[t]he existence of an agency relationship is a question of fact\ [internal quotation marks omitted]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).