Can omission of an intent to terminate a line of business be actionable?
Oliver v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 2013 WL 3971057 (Mo. Ct. App. W.D.), examines alleged omission of a plan to terminate wholesale financing for Mazda dealers, in connection with the purchase of a Mazda dealership. The buyer of the dealership alleges the finance arm sought to facilitate another firm’s sale of a Mazda dealership in connection with addressing financial difficulties of the dealership to be sold and another dealership. The buyer’s brief further references an allegation concerning what the brief describes as a “promise of permanent, captive financing”.
The brief further references allegations that the purchase of the dealership was consummated in late 2007 and that, less than a year later, the dealership received notice indicating the financing would be terminated. The brief makes reference to allegations the financing arm had plans, in some stage of formulation and development, at the time the dealership was purchased, as to terminating financing at some time in the future.
Of course, this author cannot express a view as to the actual facts. So, no view on the actual facts is presented here. Rather, let us focus on an aspect of the way the brief discusses claims and the lower court’s treatment of some claims.
More after the break …