Legal Opinion

Rollinger v. JC Penney Company

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1971No. File 10929PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Per curiam

I

The important question involved in this appeal is whether a revolving charge account agreement between the parties results in usury prohibited by our statutes. 1 By summary judgment in a suit to recover the interest paid 2 the trial court so concluded and we agree. In so doing we join another midwestern jurisdiction, Wisconsin, which recently held "charges" above the cash price lor merchandise purchased under a revolving charge account agreement that exceed maximum legal interest permitted by statute are usurious. State of Wisconsin v. J. C. Penney Co., 48 Wis.2d 125, 179 N.W.2d 641.

The…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Great Northern Railway Co. v. Sunburst Oil & Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Molitor v. Kaneland Community Unit District No. 302Illinois Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Daar v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Hare v. General Contract Purchase Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
  5. Hafer v. SpaethWashington Supreme Court · 1945

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Rathbun v. WT Grant CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  2. Turner v. Aldens, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1981
  3. State Ex Rel. Turner v. Younker Brothers, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1973
  4. State Ex Rel. Meierhenry v. Spiegel, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Whitaker v. Spiegel, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1981

25 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