Legal Opinion

Rossberg v. Holesapple

Utah Supreme Court

Decided July 27, 1953No. 7802PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOLFE, Chief Justice.

Action by the appellants to foreclose certain security given by the respondents for the payment of a $1600 promissory note executed by them. The respondents denied liability on the ground that the note was usurious. From a judgment declaring the note and the security null, void and usurious and cancelling the same, this appeal is prosecuted.

The evidence is substantially without dispute. On April 11, 1951, the respondents, as buyers, and Jack H. and La-Von M. Rohlfing, as sellers, executed an “Earnest Money Receipt and Agreement” for the purchase and sale of a house in the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Atlas Realty Corp. v. HouseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
  2. Chakales v. DjiovanidesSupreme Court of Virginia · 1933
  3. Oil City Motor Co. v. CIT CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
  4. Cobb v. HartensteinUtah Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Washington Fire Insurance v. Maple Valley Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1914

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Burr v. Capital Reserve Corp.California Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Grady v. PriceArizona Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Ross v. Producers Mutual Insurance CompanyUtah Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Seaboard Finance Co. v. WahlenUtah Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Brent Brown Dealerships v. Tax Commission, Motor Vehicle Enforcement DivisionCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2006

2 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