Legal Opinion
Dahl v. Lanesboro State Bank
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided January 27, 1987No. CO-86-1548PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
POPOVICH, Chief Judge.
Appellants challenge a summary judgment dismissing their claim alleging re spondent charged usurious interest rates. They assert the trial court erred because respondent was limited to charging interest rates permissible under Minn.Stat. § 334.-011 (1982). We affirm.
FACTS
Between January 16, 1981 and October 17, 1983, appellants Eldon H. Dahl and Jeanette M. Dahl obtained 14 agricultural loans from respondent Lanesboro State Bank, a state-chartered, federally-insured bank. The principal on each promissory note was less than $100,000 and interest rates ranged from…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Evans v. National Bank of SavannahSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Citizen's National Bank of Willmar v. TaylorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- First Bank East v. BobeldykCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
3Cited by9 opinions
- VanderWeyst v. First State Bank of BensonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- VanderWeyst v. First State Bank of BensonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Walsh v. First State Bank of PennockCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Bandas v. Citizens State Bank of Silver LakeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- First State Bank of Rushmore v. Van RulerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.