Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 07-09-2014
Case Style: Michael R. Dotson v. Story Wrecker Service, Inc.
Case Number: CJ-2014-261
Judge: Linda G. Morrissey
Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma
Plaintiff's Attorney:
If you need a personal injury lawyer in Tulsa, call: 888-354-4529 and we will help you.
Defendant's Attorney: Timothy L. Rogers
Description:
MoreLaw Suites
A Better Place To Practice Law
624 South Denver and 601 South Boulder
Click Here For More Information
918-582-3993
Tulsa, OK - Michael R. Dotson v. Story Wrecker Service, Inc.
1. On or about February 23, 2013, Storey Wrecker, Inc. towed a vehicle, 1998 Ford Explorer yIN i FMZU32P7WZBO2872, owned by Plaintiff, at the request of the Tulsa County Sheriff’s Department due to being ticketed for taxes due to the state.
2. On or about February 26, 2013, the Plaintiff appeared at Defendant’s place of business to pay any amounts owed and remove his property from Defendant’s property.
3. On the date last mentioned, the Plaintiff was advised there was a hold on the vehicle and Defendant denied Plaintiff possession of his property, despite providing title signed over to him by previous owner.
4. On or about April 23, 2013, the Defendant sent Notice of Sale to Saber Acceptance Company and Mary McMillan.
5. On or about April 24, 2013, the Defendant sold Plaintiffs vehicle at auction.
6. Defendant had actual notice that Plaintiff was a party who had an interest in the vehicle the title to the vehicle in Defendant’s possession.
7. Defendant had Plaintiffs current address to send Notice of Sale.
8. Defendant failed to provide Plaintiff Notice of Sale to Plaintiff as required by 42 0.5. §
91, etseq.
9. Plaintiff had an ownership interest in, and right to possess the above mentioned vehicle.
10. Defendant prevented Dotson from having the vehicle and unlawfully sold the vehicle, at auction.
11. Plaintiff did not consent to the sale of the vehicle.
12. Plaintiff suffered damages in excess of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) as a result of the above described unlawffil conversion of personal property by the Defendant.
13. Plaintiff is entitled to treble damages as Defendant’s actions were knowingly fraudulent pursuant to 42 0.5. § 91(B)(2).
14. Plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees pursuant to 42 0.S. § 91, et seq.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiff prays the Court grant him judgment in excess of (S 10,000.00) for conversion, award Plaintiff treble damages and reasonable attorney fees and all further relief the Court deems due and proper.
Outcome: Settled and dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: