Atlas Credit of California, Inc. v. Hill

The single question presented by this appeal is whether a transaction in the form of a written contract to “install, construct and place . . . improvements” (exhibit No. 1) in defendants Hills’ home was in reality a device for the exaction of illegal interest. The trial judge concluded that it was and imposed penalties as provided by Washington’s usury statute, RCW 19.52.030.

We do not agree.

The undisputed facts are that Superior State Construction Company, Inc., approached the Hills with a proposal to make improvements to their home under favorable terms so that “before” and “after”…