Legal Opinion

McConnell v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

California Supreme Court

Decided May 30, 1978No. L.A. 30795PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TOBRINER, J.

Plaintiffs filed a class action against defendant brokerage firm. They alleged, first, that defendant unlawfully charged compound interest on the debit balance in margin accounts without a clear written agreement authorizing the compounding of interest as required by section 2 of the Usury Law. Finding that defendant’s customer’s agreement complied with the requirements of section 2, the trial court sustained defendant’s demurrer to this charge without leave to amend.

*369Plaintiffs further alleged that defendant charged excessive interest. The complaint specifies that defendant…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Vasquez v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. La Sala v. American Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Richard Kline v. Coldwell, Banker & Co., RealtorsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974
  4. Lamb v. HerndonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  5. Burr v. Capital Reserve Corp.California Supreme Court · 1969

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. O'Brien v. Shearson Hayden Stone, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1978
  2. American Timber & Trading Co. v. First National BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  3. American Timber & Trading Co. v. First National Bank Of OregonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1982
  4. Handi Investment Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  5. Fox v. Peck Iron and Metal Co., Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California · 1982

21 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