law suit establishing 1957 Mark ii

[John West]

I understand there is a law suit that established the first 1957 Mark ii as VIN C56L3418. Where can I find this suit and its findings?

[Pat Marshall]

Regading the details of this case, you'll probably find it after a good internet search. Please share the details with the Forum members.

We do have a little information which we posted in the history of car #2648 which might assist you in your search - In 1960 Johnny Mattox Company sued Ford Motor on the basis of the dealer contract which said if Ford introduced a new and "equivalent" car to the Mark II, but with a lower price then Ford would refund to the dealer the difference in the cost between the Mark II and the new "equivalent" car. This pertained to cars that the dealer had in stock when the new "equivalent" car was introduced.

Johnny Maddox Motor Company had one Mark II in stock and sued for the difference of the dealer cost for the Mark II ($8,350) and the new Mark II ($3,996).

The courts sided with Ford ruling that the Mark III was a "replacement" car, not an "equivalent" car. Court documents do not reveal if this car was the one remaining in inventory, but court recorts cited this car as one that was sold by Mattox.

I hope this helps.

[John West]

I am trying to find the law suit that established the first VIN of the first 1957 Mark ii. According to our site the first 1957 has a vin of C56L3418. Has this vin actually been established by law?

[linc64]

This is the long version of what Pat describes above.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=2006&as_vis=1

[John West]

I finally had a chance to read the responses to my question of the law suit that established the FIRST 1957 Mark ii. I did not read anything that established the vin of what would be considered the first 1957. Did I miss something? I know what this site lists as the first 1957 but how was that established?

[John Graham]

I finally had a chance to read the responses to my question of the law suit that established the FIRST 1957 Mark ii. I did not read anything that established the vin of what would be considered the first 1957. Did I miss something? I know what this site lists as the first 1957 but how was that established?

John West, did you ever find the answer to your question about the law suit to establish the first 1976 Mark II made? I have just purchased C56L4318 so am very curious to find out more since that car is mentioned in your post. I hope that you are still on this forum. John Graham

[Barry Wolk]

"Johnny Maddox Motor Company had one Mark II in stock and sued for the difference of the dealer cost for the Mark II ($8,350) and the new Mark II ($3,996)."

I don't believe any Mark new Mark II ever sold for $3,996, ever. Must be a typo.

[tluke]

My '57 Mark II came titled as a 1956 Lincoln Continental so I put together a PDF for the UT DMV to document that it was a 1957 Continental (not a Lincoln).
Somewhere in this forum is this chart. I couldn't find it right off but I saved it. It shows that the L in C56L3418 stands for the production month of October (1956). It's based on page 267 of the Continental Mark II Technical Data manual (shop manual). Page 266 decodes the VIN number to explain the month code portion. I have 3446, also built in October and the original invoice shows it went to the car expo in NY where the new 57 models were being unveiled.

I have also attached the page from my PDF I created for the DMV as mentioned above that clarifies a little more about the 56/57 differentiation, but the law suit attachment in a previous post in this thread is pretty definitive.
ProductionCodes4Dates_AllYears.jpg

PDF page 7:
https://tluke.com/pdfs/MarkII_57andN...ntation-p7.pdf

I actually never needed the PDF. My DVM has new software that automatically spits out 1957 Continental Mark II when the VIN is put in

Terry

[Barry Wolk]

My '57 Mark II came titled as a 1956 Lincoln Continental so I put together a PDF for the UT DMV to document that it was a 1957 Continental (not a Lincoln).
Somewhere in this forum is this chart. I couldn't find it right off but I saved it. It shows that the L in C56L3418 stands for the production month of October (1956). It's based on page 267 of the Continental Mark II Technical Data manual (shop manual). Page 266 decodes the VIN number to explain the month code portion. I have 3446, also built in October and the original invoice shows it went to the car expo in NY where the new 57 models were being unveiled.

I have also attached the page from my PDF I created for the DMV as mentioned above that clarifies a little more about the 56/57 differentiation, but the law suit attachment in a previous post in this thread is pretty definitive.
ProductionCodes4Dates_AllYears.jpg

PDF page 7:
https://tluke.com/pdfs/MarkII_57andN...ntation-p7.pdf

I actually never needed the PDF. My DVM has new software that automatically spits out 1957 Continental Mark II when the VIN is put in

Terry

It might help to understand that Ford had noting to do with with titles. They sold through distributors in different states that sold to dealers. Dealers handled the bill of sale and filled out the title application by the lowest-paid member of the clerical staff at Lincoln dealers. The terms Lincoln and Continental were melded for the 1940 production of the Lincoln-Zephyr Continental and then became the "Lincoln Continental" that clerks picked up on and erroneously filled in "Lincoln" as the maker and "Continental" as the model. It was a simple mistake often missed at the DMV by their lowest-paid clerks. I've found it quite simple to get that corrected on the title as Michigan has the Mark II shown now as a Continental Division product.

As far as a distinct model year, Continental didn't want one as they were trying to emulate series cars like Bentley and Rolls-Royce. The series was supposed to be C56 with no model. As much as I've read on the subject I've never seen a Ford reference to the Rolls-Royce being a competitor, but at 35% more than the Mark II I don't think that's correct. Different markets. I've heard it called the Rolls-Royce of American cars, but never from Ford. I doubt that a traditional R-R owner would ever buy a Mark II to save a few bucks, to them.