Legal Opinion

Pysh v. Security Pacific Housing Service

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 29, 1992No. 636PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge.

This case presents a single issue — whether a financing company’s use of the “Rule of 78s” method of calculating the unearned finance charge to be rebated to the owner of a mobile home upon prepayment of his/her installment sales contract for the mobile home violates the Motor Vehicle Sales Finance Act. The trial court found that such a method of calculation does not violate the Act. Finding no error in the trial court’s analysis, we affirm.

The issue arises in the context of an action commenced by appellants, Daniel J. and Janice L. Pysh, against appellee Security Pacific Housing…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Pawlowski v. SmortoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  2. Lanier v. Associates Finance, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Jungkurth v. Eastern Financial Services, Inc. (In Re Rhoda Jungkurth)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Chappell v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Doe v. Dyer-GoodeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hall v. Amica Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Jenkins v. County of SchuylkillSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois v. Joseph N. DibartoloCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
  4. Bleday v. Oum GroupSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. CHIJIOKE-UCHE v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2021

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API