Legal Opinion

Ghirardo v. Antonioli

California Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 1994No. S032435PublishedCited by 303 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BAXTER, J.

—This case demonstrates the complexity, uncertainty, and sometimes unexpected results of California’s usury law. The owners of undeveloped real property sold it to a prospective developer and received a promissory note and deed of trust to the property. The new owner sold it to another buyer, who purchased it subject to that note and deed of trust. No one contends either of these transactions was usurious. A payment dispute arose, and the new buyer sued the first seller to prevent foreclosure. After extensive negotiations, the parties agreed to a debt restructuring. The buyer…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Penziner v. West American Finance Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Security Pacific National Bank v. WozabCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  3. People v. LouisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
  4. West Pico Furniture Co. v. Pacific Finance LoansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Terry Trading Corp. v. BarskyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by303 opinions

  1. Ghirardo v. AntonioliCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  2. City of Santa Maria v. AdamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  3. Kyle v. CarmonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  4. Board of Administration v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
  5. Brown v. GrimesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

298 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