Legal Opinion
Coley v. Wolcott
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 10, 1930No. Docket No. 7057PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DOOLING, J., pro tem.
Appellant sued to recover treble the amount alleged to have been paid to respondent as interest for the use of money in violation of the statute against usury. (Stats. 1919, p. lxxxiii.)
The parties entered into a contract in writing in the following language:
‘‘ Oakland, California
“May 4, 1925.
“This memorandum of agreement made and entered into this day by and between H. E. Wolcott and J. A. Coley, witnesseth:
“That whereas H. E. Wolcott has this day entered into an agreement with the Bank of Alameda to redeem from foreclosure sale at an expense of $8425.75 that certain…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Illinois Trust & Savings Bank v. Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Peck v. NoeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Foreman v. NeedlesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Los Angeles City High School District v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Shelley v. ByersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Martin v. Ajax Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954
- Ury v. Jewelers Acceptance Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1964
- Rose v. WheelerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Thomassen v. CarrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Arneill Ranch v. PetitCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.