Legal Opinion

Morgan Motor & Finance Co. v. Oliver

Utah Supreme Court

Decided April 10, 1942No. 6356PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McDonough, Justice.

This action was originally commenced in the City Court of Salt Lake City by appellant seeking the possession of a certain automobile sold to respondent under a conditional sales contract. Respondent cross-complained alleging the contract to be usurious and hence void by virtue of Section 44-0-2, R. S. U. 1933, as amended by Chapter 42, Laws of Utah 1935; that he was entitled to a return of all moneys paid under said contract under the provisions of Section 44-0-7, R. S. U. 1933.

From a finding on all the issues in favor of appellant, respondent appealed to the district…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Edler v. EdwardsUtah Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Sayler v. BradyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Seebold v. EustermannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  2. Bell v. Idaho Finance Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Petersen v. Philco Finance CorporationIdaho Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Mathis v. Holland Furnace Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Seebold v. EustermannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API