For Your Data Ertel V. Radio Corp. Of America Illustration Brief
October 03, 2019
Edit
Ertel v. Radio Corp. of America case brief summary
307 N.E.2d 471 (1974)
CASE FACTS
Defendant personally guaranteed a banker's complaint given past times his employer to obtain financing from plaintiff loan company. To secure the financing, the employer assigned its accounts receivable to plaintiff loan company. The employer defaulted on the note. Plaintiff loan companionship sought in addition to obtained summary judgment against accused on the note. Defendant paid the amount due on the banker's complaint in addition to and thus claimed a correct of subrogation equally to the receivables. The trial courtroom ruled against defendant.
DISCUSSION
The courtroom affirmed inward business office in addition to reversed inward part, ruling that accused was entitled to subrogation equally a surety because allegations of wrongdoing were unsubstantiated, in addition to remanding to permit plaintiff client to assert a set-off for defective goods.
Suggested police pull schoolhouse report materials




Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
307 N.E.2d 471 (1974)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiffs appealed from a judgment of the Indiana Court of Appeals, which reversed a summary judgment for plaintiffs entered inward the trial courtroom in addition to allowed accused a correct of subrogation equally a surety without set-off.CASE FACTS
Defendant personally guaranteed a banker's complaint given past times his employer to obtain financing from plaintiff loan company. To secure the financing, the employer assigned its accounts receivable to plaintiff loan company. The employer defaulted on the note. Plaintiff loan companionship sought in addition to obtained summary judgment against accused on the note. Defendant paid the amount due on the banker's complaint in addition to and thus claimed a correct of subrogation equally to the receivables. The trial courtroom ruled against defendant.
DISCUSSION
- The appellate courtroom reversed, asset that accused was entitled to subrogation in addition to that plaintiff client had no correct of set-off for defective goods.
- The courtroom affirmed the ruling that accused had a correct of subrogation because he was a surety, finding no substantial prove that accused had acted inward bad faith.
- However, the courtroom reversed the denial of set-off, asset that such a defense strength was permitted past times U.C.C. § 9-318.
- The courtroom remanded accordingly.
The courtroom affirmed inward business office in addition to reversed inward part, ruling that accused was entitled to subrogation equally a surety because allegations of wrongdoing were unsubstantiated, in addition to remanding to permit plaintiff client to assert a set-off for defective goods.
Suggested police pull schoolhouse report materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials