Legal Opinion

Mirgon v. Sherk

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 16, 1938No. 27205. Department TwoPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSimpson, J.

— This action was begun to collect the balance due upon a promissory note and to foreclose a chattel mortgage given to secure its payment. Subsequent to the execution of the promissory note and mortgage, hereinafter referred to, the respondent obtained a divorce from the defendant. She did not answer, and the respondent appeared solely on his own behalf, admitted the making of the note and mortgage, and alleged that the interest charged was usurious. After a trial to the court, judgment was rendered in favor of the respondent. The appellant urges that the court erred in holding that the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Motor Contract Co. v. Van Der VolgenWashington Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Edwards v. Surety Finance Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Carstens Packing Co. v. Southern Pacific Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Tacoma Hotel, Inc. v. Morrison Co., Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Farley v. FairWashington Supreme Court · 1927

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Meierhenry v. Spiegel, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Ury v. Jewelers Acceptance Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. Trinidad Industrial Bank v. RomeroNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Achilles v. HoopesWashington Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Jeffrey v. Whitworth CollegeDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 1955

3 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