Legal Opinion

First Bank East v. Bobeldyk

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 22, 1986No. C4-86-242PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FORSBERG, Judge.

This is an appeal from summary judgment entered for respondent First Bank East on its claim demanding payment on a promissory note. Appellant Irving Bobel-dyk’s defense of usury was earlier stricken by order for partial summary judgment. We affirm.

FACTS

Appellant is a self-employed real estate salesman, who borrowed funds from the respondent bank beginning in 1978. He obtained a number of loans, executing a promissory note on each occasion. After 1980, these notes represented renewal loans rather than new borrowing. The terms of the last four of these notes were as…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tiffany v. National Bank of Mo.Supreme Court of the United States · 1874
  2. Fred Fisher, on Behalf of Himself and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. First National Bank of Omaha, Omaha, NebraskaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1977
  3. Citizen's National Bank of Willmar v. TaylorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  4. Attorney General v. Equitable Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1982

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. VanderWeyst v. First State Bank of BensonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  2. Dahl v. Lanesboro State BankCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
  3. VanderWeyst v. First State Bank of BensonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
  4. Walsh v. First State Bank of PennockCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
  5. Bandas v. Citizens State Bank of Silver LakeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987

5 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