# Teegardin v. Foley

> Ohio Supreme Court · June 26, 1957 · 166 Ohio St. (N.S.) 449

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8354850

## Case

- **Full name:** Teegardin v. Foley, Motor Vehicle Dealers' and Salesmen's Licensing Board
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 26, 1957
- **Citations:** 166 Ohio St. (N.S.) 449
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Bell
- **Judges:** Bell, Herbert, Matthias, Stewart, Taet, Weygandt, Zlmmerman
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8354850

## Opinion text

Bell, J.,
dissenting. It appears to me that the desired prevention of evils and the protection needed for the buying public are amply accomplished by the disclosure provisions of Sections 1317.02 and 1317.04, Revised Code.
Although in these days of increasing governmental control over private business it may be considered old-fashioned, I adhere to the fundamental proposition that a person should be allowed to dispose of his own personal property on whatever *466 terms and under whatever conditions he and a person with whom he freely contracts may agree upon so long as those terms and conditions do not unlawfully invade the rights of others. The disclosure provisions of the Retail Installment Sales Act, in my opinion, obviate the necessity of imposing further controls on the disposition of personal property.
Stewart, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8354850. Public record. Not legal advice.