Legal Opinion · Dissent

Johnson's Sales Co., Inc. v. Harris

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 28, 2007No. 06-1237Published

1DissentTom Glaze, Justice

I disagree that this is a proper class under Ark. R. Civ. P. 23. The majority correctly posits that, as a general rule, a claim for usury is determined when the “contract [is] entered into.” Ark. Const, art. 19, § 13; see also General Contract Corp. v. Duke, 223 Ark. 938, 270 S.W.2d 918 (1954) (“our cases hold that the transaction is to be judged at the time the contract is entered into, and not thereafter.”). The majority, however, mistakenly assumes that the face of the contract alone is all the evidence that is required to determine whether a usurious rate was charged at the time the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Williamson v. Sanofi Winthrop Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  2. Fraley v. Williams Ford Tractor & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  3. General Contract Corp. v. DukeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1954
  4. Dillon v. Resolution Trust Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  5. Cooprider v. Security BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API