Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hardwick v. Austin Gallery of Oriental Rugs, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided October 25, 1989No. 3-88-043-CVPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJones, Justice

I fully concur with that portion of the majority’s opinion which overrules appellant’s points of error, and which overrules appellee’s cross-points regarding the DTPA and delay damages. I am unable to agree, however, with that portion which sustains appellee’s cross-point regarding usury, and I respectfully dissent therefrom.

In 1980, appellee bought a tract of real property from appellant, giving appellant a promissory note in the amount of $160,000. The note, which was secured by a deed of trust on the property, provided for interest at the rate of 10% per annum. It provided for monthly…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Guaranty County Mutual Insurance Co. v. ReynaTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Steves Sash & Door Co. v. Ceco Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Pinnacle Homes Inc. v. R.C.L. Offshore Engineering Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1982
  4. Lawler v. Lomas & Nettleton Mortgage InvestorsTexas Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Butler v. Holt MacHinery Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1987

2 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