Legal Opinion

Gershman Investment Corp. v. Danforth

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided December 13, 1971No. 56373PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOLMAN, Judge.

In this declaratory judgment action plaintiff, for itself and others similarly situated, sought a judgment declaring that certain opinions of the defendant Attorney General which ruled that § 362.195 1 is unconstitutional are erroneous and further declaring that said statute “is constitutional in all respects.” The petition also prayed that defendant be enjoined from instituting quo warranto proceedings against plaintiff and other corporations making FHA loans at interest rates in excess of 8% per annum. The trial court did not grant the injunctive relief but adjudged that the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. LAWYERS'ASSOCIATION OF ST. LOUIS v. City of St. LouisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1956
  2. Triplett v. Grundy Electric Cooperative, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1965
  3. Corken v. WorkmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Tootle v. TootleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1962

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Gershman Investment Corporation v. DanforthSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974
  2. State Ex Rel. Toedebusch Transfer, Inc. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1975
  3. State ex rel. Cervantes v. BloomMissouri Court of Appeals · 1972
  4. Mudgett v. PetersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1972
  5. State v. KoenigMissouri Court of Appeals · 2003

7 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