(Download) "Transportation Equipment Rentals v. A. E." by Supreme Court of Nebraska ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Transportation Equipment Rentals v. A. E.
- Author : Supreme Court of Nebraska
- Release Date : January 18, 1969
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 62 KB
Description
This is an action on a contract providing for the purchase by plaintiff of trucks owned by the defendant, the leasing of trucks
to defendant, and the repurchase by defendant, on termination of the leasing contract, of the trucks which defendant had sold
to the plaintiff. Among other matters, defendant pleaded fraud attendant upon the execution of the contract. On trial, a verdict
was rendered for defendant and, subsequently, plaintiff's motion for a new trial was sustained. We affirm the order granting
a new trial. Plaintiff is engaged in the business of leasing trucks and trucking equipment. Defendant had operated a trucking business
for many years and in connection with this business owned and operated several trucks. The parties entered into an agreement
whereby defendant sold seven of his truck-tractors to plaintiff. Plaintiff repaired or reconditioned five of the tractors
and leased them back to defendant under a written leasing contract. The contract provided that on its termination, defendant
lessee was to repurchase the leased equipment for a specified sum, less an annual specified allowance for depreciation, but
such sum was not to be in any event less than 15 percent of the value placed on the equipment at the time the contract was
entered into. Plaintiff lessor agreed to provide fuel, oil, lubricants, tires, tubes, and other operating supplies and to
reimburse defendant lessee at the rate of 25.5 cents per gallon for fuel, oil, and lubricants necessarily purchased away from
plaintiff's garage. Defendant terminated the contract but refused to repurchase the trucks and failed to pay certain other
items claimed to be due under the contract. One defense pleaded and relied upon by defendant was that there was fraud in the
inducement of the contract. He contends, in substance, that he had been assured by plaintiff's agent that the provisions of
the contract relating to the repurchasing of the trucks and to the 25.5 cents per gallon reimbursement for supplies purchased
away from plaintiff's garage would not be enforced.