Matulich v. Marlo Investment Co.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment determining that by the adoption by the people of article XX, section 22, of the Constitution in 1934 the Usury Law (Stats. 1919, p. lxxxiii, Deering’s Gen. Laws [1931], Act 3757) has been repealed.
The facts giving rise to this controversy are not in dispute, and are as follows: Defendant is licensed as a personal property broker under the Personal Property Brokers Act as amended. (Stats. 1933, p. 1496, chap. 577.) In June of 1935, defendant, while acting as such broker, loaned to plaintiff the sum of $300, which loan was evidenced by a promissory note…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Carter v. Seaboard Finance Co.California Supreme Court · 1949
- West Pico Furniture Co. v. Pacific Finance LoansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- Heald v. Friis-HansenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Wolf v. Pacific Southwest Discount Corp.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Riebe v. Budget Financial Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1968
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.