Legal Opinion

Wiesner v. Bbd Partnership

Montana Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1993No. 92-278PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harrison

This is an appeal from a judgment entered after a non-jury trial in the Thirteenth Judicial District, Yellowstone County, the Honorable Robert W. Holmstrom presiding. The District Court found the parties to be joint venturers and denied appellants’ claim for usury penalties. We affirm.

The dispositive issues on appeal are:

1. Did the District Court err in finding that the parties were involved in a joint venture?

2. Should the District Court have applied usury laws to this “transaction” whether or not it was a joint venture?

Appellants Frank Hartman, Jr. (Hartman) and Robert Wiesner (Wiesner)…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Rae v. CameronMontana Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Papp v. Rocky Mountain Oil & Minerals, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Martter v. ByersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  4. Trad Industries, Ltd. v. BroganMontana Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Bennett v. DodgsonMontana Supreme Court · 1955

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Rafanelli v. DaleMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Banderob v. Estate of BanderobMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Border States Paving v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API