Legal Opinion

Janisse v. Winston Investment Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 22, 1957No. Civ. 17385PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.

Plaintiffs brought this action for an accounting and other relief, alleging that a promissory note signed by them was usurious. Defendants claimed to be bona fide purchasers of the note. The trial court found that the transaction was usurious and that defendants knew that it was, and entered its judgment reducing the principal of the note by the amount of the interest paid and by treble the amount of interest paid during the year preceding the filing of this action. Defendants appeal, contending that plaintiffs are estopped from urging the usury, that evidence was improperly admitted, arid…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Scott v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Milana v. Credit Discount Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Stock v. MeekCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. People v. MoraniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Martin v. Ajax Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Ghirardo v. AntonioliCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  3. West Pico Furniture Co. v. Pacific Finance LoansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Forte v. NolfiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  5. Domarad v. Fisher & Burke, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1969

35 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