United-Bilt Homes, Inc. v. Teague
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Dissent
John A. Fogleman, Justice.
I respectfully dissent. I do not disagree with the principles stated in the court’s opinion, as much as I disagree with the application made of them. I particularly agree that the courts should be zealous in protecting borrowers and installment credit purchasers against any fraud, trick, scheme, device or shield cloaking a usurious charge for loan or forbearance of money. I do not think that the penalty provided by our constitution is too severe when lenders exact usurious charges, either by blatant disregard of our usury laws or by any scheme or evasion. The zeal of…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Hare v. General Contract Purchase Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
- Sloan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1957
- Commercial Credit Plan, Inc. v. ChandlerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1951
- Winston v. Personal Finance Co. of Pine Bluff, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
- Eldred v. HartSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.