Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Texas Commerce Bank-Arlington v. Goldring

Texas Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1984No. C-2248Published

1ConcurrenceSpears, Justice

I reluctantly concur. No longer is there any viable claim of usury against the extra *105charges made by a bank. The principle now seems well established that any expenses incurred by a bank to protect its security and collect its loan may be added to the interest charged on the indebtedness without violating the usury laws.

Those business expenses of a lending institution that may be added to the debt without being called “interest” are now without limitation. This court has held a plethora of charges can be added to the interest charged on an indebtedness without being charges for the “use,…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Stedman v. Georgetown Savings & Loan Ass'nTexas Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Gonzales County Savings & Loan Ass'n v. FreemanTexas Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Greever v. PerskyTexas Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Anguiano v. Jim Walter Homes, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1978
  5. Crow v. Home Savings Association of Dallas CountyTexas Supreme Court · 1975

16 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