Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Herring v. Chris Myers Pontiac-GMC, Inc.
Citations: 628 So. 2d 574; 1993 Ala. LEXIS 1128; 1993 WL 462073Docket: 1921077
Court: Supreme Court of Alabama; October 29, 1993; Alabama; State Supreme Court
Chris Myers Pontiac-GMC, Inc. (Myers Pontiac) sold a vehicle to Angie L. Herring, adding a $129 "document fee" to the purchase price. Herring sued, claiming that Myers Pontiac misrepresented the purpose of this fee. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Myers Pontiac, which Herring appealed. Evidence presented indicated that a Myers Pontiac representative described the fee as a “document fee,” while the company’s responses to interrogatories revealed the fee was used to cover various operational expenses, including salaries and office equipment. In considering the summary judgment, it is the responsibility of the movant to demonstrate that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law, as established in Fincher v. Robinson Brothers Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. Myers Pontiac contended that it did not misrepresent the fee; however, the evidence suggested otherwise. The court found that Myers Pontiac did not meet its burden to show that there was no genuine issue regarding the misrepresentation of the document fee's purpose. Consequently, the summary judgment was deemed improper and was reversed and remanded for further proceedings. The decision was concurred by Chief Justice Hornsby and Justices Almon, Adams, and Ingram.