From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jim Barnett Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jan 27, 1966
355 F.2d 502 (5th Cir. 1966)

Opinion

No. 22482.

January 27, 1966.

Willis J. Richardson, Jr., and Richardson Doremus, Savannah, Ga., for Jim Barnett Motors, Inc. t/a Barnett Edsel Sales, appellant.

Robert M. Hitch, John E. Simpson, Savannah, Ga., J. Michael Guenther, Dearborn, Mich., Hitch, Miller, Beckmann Simpson, Savannah, Ga., of counsel, for appellee.

Before GEWIN and BELL, Circuit Judges, and HUGHES, District Judge.


The appellant (Barnett) sued the appellee (Ford) on a three count complaint arising out of a dealer and manufacturer's contract for the sale of Edsel automobiles in Savannah, Georgia. In 1959, Ford discontinued production of the automobile because of poor public acceptance. Appellant's three counts are grounded on the following: (1) The act relating to Automobile Dealer Suits Against Manufacturers, 15 U.S.C.A. Sections 1221- 1225; (2) breach of contract; and (3) tort, counts two and three being based on Georgia law. A copy of the contract is attached to the complaint. Affidavits, interrogatories and answers were submitted in support of and in opposition to appellee's motion for summary judgment. The District Court granted the motion and rendered summary judgment for Ford.

The underlying basis of each of appellant's claims is the termination of production of the Edsel automobile. There is no dispute as to any material fact. Our review of the record and the contentions of the parties convinces us that the trial court was correct in granting summary judgment. See Kotula v. Ford Motor Company, 338 F.2d 732, 734 (8 Cir. 1964), cert. den. 380 U.S. 979, 85 S.Ct. 1333, 14 L.Ed.2d 273 (1965); Globe Motors, Inc. v. Studebaker Packard Corporation, 328 F.2d 645, 646 (3 Cir. 1964); Pierce Ford Sales, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company, 299 F.2d 425, 430 (2 Cir. 1962), cert. den. 371 U.S. 829, 83 S.Ct. 24, 9 L.Ed.2d 66 (1962); Woodard v. General Motors Corporation, 298 F.2d 121, 127, 128 (5 Cir. 1962), cert. den. 369 U.S. 887, 82 S.Ct. 1161, 8 L.Ed. 2d 288, rehearing den. 370 U.S. 965, 82 S.Ct. 1584, 8 L.Ed.2d 834 (1962); Associated Beverages Company v. P. Ballantine Sons, 287 F.2d 261 (5 Cir. 1961); Atlanta Gas Light Company v. Newman, 88 Ga. App. 252, 76 S.E.2d 536 (1953).

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

Jim Barnett Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jan 27, 1966
355 F.2d 502 (5th Cir. 1966)
Case details for

Jim Barnett Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company

Case Details

Full title:JIM BARNETT MOTORS, INC., t/a Barnett Edsel Sales, Appellant, v. FORD…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jan 27, 1966

Citations

355 F.2d 502 (5th Cir. 1966)

Citing Cases

Wolf Studebaker, Inc. v. Studebaker-Packard Corp.

Plaintiffs can offer no legal precedent or authority for the position they espouse, but call upon the court…

Hechler Chevrolet v. General Motors Corp.

Cases construing the federal statute popularly known as the Automobile Dealer's Day in Court Act, 15 U.S.C. §…