Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Uresti

• Court: Texas Civil Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: McDONALD
• Citation: Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Uresti, 581 S.W.2d 298 (Tex. Ct. App. 1979)
• Decision Date: 03 May 1979
• Docket Number: No. 5966,5966
• Parties: FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY, Appellant, v. Alberto URESTI et al., Appellees.

Page 298

581 S.W.2d 298

FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY, Appellant, v. Alberto URESTI et al., Appellees.

No. 5966.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Waco.

May 3, 1979.

Rehearing Denied May 24, 1979.

Doyle L. Coatney, Kelfer & Coatney, San Antonio, for appellant.

John L. Sanders, LeLaurin, Adams, Eichelbaum & Sanders, P. C., Walter C. Wolff, Jr., Wolff & Wolff, San Antonio, for appellees.

OPINION

McDONALD, Chief Justice.

Plaintiff (appellant) Ford Motor Credit Company sued (appellees) defendants Uresti and Hernandez alleging Uresti purchased a used Ford 4000 diesel tractor from Farmers Tractor and Equipment Company, executing a retail installment contract dated July 3, 1975 for same; that Farmers Tractor and Equipment Company transferred such installment contract to plaintiff; that Uresti was in arrears $2,978.80 on such contract; and that Uresti had transferred the tractor to Hernandez. Ford sought judgment for $2,978.80, $446. attorneys' fees, and foreclosure of its lien against Uresti; and judgment for possession of the tractor against Hernandez.

Uresti answered that the retail installment contract violated Title 15, Section 1601 of the United States Code (the Truth in Lending Act) and Article 5069 Texas Civil Statutes (the Consumer Credit Code), prayed plaintiff take nothing, and that he be awarded penalties and attorneys' fees provided by such laws.

Hernandez answered he had paid Uresti $5,000. for the tractor without actual notice of Ford's security interest, and that the retail installment contract was invalid under the Federal Truth in Lending Act and the Texas Consumer Credit Code. Hernandez prayed Ford take nothing as to him; and cross claimed against Uresti for $5,000. plus attorneys' fees in the event Ford should recover possession of the tractor from him.

Trial was to the court which rendered judgment: 1) For plaintiff Ford against defendant Uresti for $2,978.80 (due on the installment contract) plus $446. attorneys' fees; less an offset of $1,000. for violation by Ford of the Federal Truth in Lending Act plus $850. attorneys' fees; leaving net judgment for Ford against Uresti for $1,574.80; 2) For defendant Hernandez for the tractor free and clear of lien.

Plaintiff Ford appeals on 3 points contending among other matters:

The trial court erred in rendering judgment the tractor was property of Hernandez, free and clear of any lien, as Hernandez had constructive notice of the lien.

Farmers Tractor and Equipment Company sold Uresti a used Ford tractor July 3, 1975. Uresti executed a retail installment contract to Farmers which assigned same to Ford July 9, 1975. Ford filed the financing statement which retained a lien on the tractor with the County Clerk. In July 1976 Uresti sold the tractor to Hernandez, representing the tractor was free and clear...