Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Ramsdell
Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Ramsdell
Opinion of the Court
The defendants, associated in various ways with a Ford dealership, have appealed an interlocutory order of the Superior Court, Washington County, approving a writ of attachment in the amount of $32,-000 under M.R.Civ.P. 4A to secure payment of any judgment that the plaintiff, Ford Motor Credit Company, may recover. The complaint alleges that certain amounts are due the plaintiff by virtue of a “dealer recourse provision” in various conditional sales contracts assigned to it by the dealership and that additional amounts are due because the dealership had misrepresented certain sales transactions. We entertain this appeal from an interlocutory order by virtue of the “collateral order” exception to the final judgment rule. Northeast Investment Co. v. Leisure Living Communities, 351 A.2d 845, 847-51 (Me. 1976).
We conclude that the defendants’ argument is without merit. The District Court order did not become final until we affirmed the dismissal of the appeal in the forcible entry and detainer case.
The entry is:
Judgment affirmed.
All concurring.
. Ford Motor Credit Company v. Machias Ford, Mercury, Inc., 509 A.2d 658 (Me. 1986).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY v. Kenneth RAMSDELL
- Status
- Published