Appellant vendee challenged the judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County (California), which was in favor of respondent vendor in the vendee’s action to rescind a conditional sales contract, to be relieved of forfeiture under the contract, and to recover payments that the vendee made to the vendor under the contract.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. are the best San Diego attorneys for restaurant business
The parties entered into a conditional sale contract and the vendee took possession of various tractors. The vendee paid a portion of the purchase price at that time and agreed to pay the remainder in monthly installments. The vendee failed to pay any installments timely and then failed to pay any installments at all. The vendor advised the vendee that unless payment in full was made, he would repossess the equipment. After the vendor repossessed the equipment, the vendee tendered the entire balance that was due, but the vendor refused to accept it. The vendee then served his notice of rescission and demanded that the vendor return the amounts that the vendee had paid. The vendor refused and the vendee filed an action against him. The trial court found in favor of the vendor and the court agreed that judgment in favor of the vendor was proper. The vendee was not protected from forfeiture by Cal. Civ. Code § 3275 because his breach of the contract was willful and grossly negligent. The vendor was not unjustly enriched because the reasonable rental value of the tractors while in the possession of the vendee was in excess of the amount that he paid under the contract.
The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court that was in favor of the vendor.