Legal Opinion
Universal Metals & MacHinery, Inc. v. Bohart
Texas Supreme Court
Decided June 23, 1976No. B-5351PublishedCited by 94 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
POPE, Justice.
Universal Metals and a number of amicus curiae briefs forcefully urge that this court did not give Article 1302-2.09 its intended meaning by our original opinion. We are convinced that we were wrong in holding that the Boharts were not guarantors within the meaning of that statute and that they could assert their claim for usury. We grant the motion for rehearing, withdraw our former opinion, set aside our former judgment, and substitute this opinion for our former one.
Universal Metals & Machinery, Inc., hereafter called Universal, instituted this suit…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Carozza v. Federal Finance & Credit Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1925
- AJ Armstrong, Inc. v. Janburt Embroidery Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1967
- Leader v. Dinkler Management Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1967
- Dahmes v. Industrial Credit Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
- Motor & Industrial Finance Corporation v. HughesTexas Supreme Court · 1957
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by94 opinions
- Insurance Co. of North America v. MorrisTexas Supreme Court · 1998
- The Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corp., Etc., and First Gibraltar Bank, Fsb, Intervenor-Appellee v. Jack GriffinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Attayi, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1988
- In the Matter of James T. Bohart, Bankrupt. The Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York v. James T. BohartCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
- Martin v. First Rep. Bank, Fort WorthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1990
89 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.