TYE v. SPITZER-DODGE

No. C-2-77-893.

499 F.Supp. 687 (1980)

Edna F. TYE, Plaintiff, v. SPITZER-DODGE, Defendant.

United States District Court, S. D. Ohio, E. D.

October 24, 1980.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

James W. Rickman, Columbus, Ohio, for plaintiff.

George R. Nickerson, James H. Callard, Loveland, Callard & Clapham, Columbus, Ohio, for defendant.


OPINION AND ORDER

KINNEARY, District Judge.

This action was instituted by the plaintiff, Edna F. Tye, alleging that the defendant, Spitzer-Dodge, failed to comply with the odometer tampering and disclosure requirements of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act of 1972, 15 U.S.C. § 1981 et seq. The matter is now before the Court on defendant's motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure....

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases