Chuck Denson owned a car dealership, aBCD auto Inc. that was licensed to sell cars in Tarrant and wood counties but not in Dallas County. Through its agent, Otis Chapman, Dallas County Credit Union and Denson agreed that Denson would find cars for the credit union's customers that the credit union would finance. The activities were all conducted in Dallas County. The profits would be split one-third among each of aBCD, Denson, and Chapman. after making sales, Denson sued, alleging that Chapman had understated the sale prices reducing the share paid to aBCD and Denson. The credit union said the agreement was void for illegality because aBCD was not licensed. was the agreement void?

Question

Business

Nina Barron

16 July, 06:04

Chuck Denson owned a car dealership, aBCD auto Inc. that was licensed to sell cars in Tarrant and wood counties but not in Dallas County. Through its agent, Otis Chapman, Dallas County Credit Union and Denson agreed that Denson would find cars for the credit union's customers that the credit union would finance. The activities were all conducted in Dallas County. The profits would be split one-third among each of aBCD, Denson, and Chapman. after making sales, Denson sued, alleging that Chapman had understated the sale prices reducing the share paid to aBCD and Denson. The credit union said the agreement was void for illegality because aBCD was not licensed. was the agreement void?

+3

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Braydon Abbott · Answer 1

The agreement was void, as the doctrine of illegality does not apply here because the defense of affirmation is only applicable when the contract cannot be legally performed. The company had no legal liability to perform the business as the automobile dealer from any of the location in Dallas County.

There was no evidence and the decision would have been in the favor of N, they can be termed as doing the breach of fiduciary duty as the tortfeasor, but is affirmed in all other respects.