Legal Opinion

Clarke v. Horany

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 24, 1963No. Civ. 25966PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFiles, J.

This is an action brought under section 3 of the Usury Law 1 to recover treble damages for interest paid. After a trial without a jury the court gave judgment in favor of all defendants. Thereafter the court granted plaintiff’s motion for a new trial, specifying insufficiency of the evidence as one of the grounds for the ruling. Defendants have appealed from the order granting a new trial and plaintiff has taken a cross-appeal from the judgment, invoking the procedure authorized by rule 3(b) of the California Rules of Court. *

In passing upon plaintiff’s motion for a new trial the trial court…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Penziner v. West American Finance Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Commerce Trust Co. v. BestTexas Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Penziner v. West American Finance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1933
  4. Nuckolls v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Calimpco, Inc. v. WardenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Forte v. NolfiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  2. DCM PARTNERS v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  3. Pease v. TaylorNevada Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Creative Ventures, LLC v. Jim Ward & AssociatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  5. Brice v. Plain Green, LLC.District Court, N.D. California · 2019

6 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