Legal Opinion · Dissent

Brown v. Polk

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 13, 1959No. 5-1828-1829-1830Published

1DissentJ. Seaborn Holt, J.

I would affirm the three decrees in their entirety. I agree with the majority that the plea of usury cannot be sustained as to real estate notes, but I do not agree that usury attaches to the three furnish notes in the circumstances here. It appears undisputed that the furnish account notes were due in the case of Alonza Haggins and Ostelle Haggins on November 1, 1957 and in the Brown case on October 15, 1957. None of the notes, involved, called for more than 10% interest and were admittedly valid notes. The evidence shows (and Mr. Polk testified) that for some time he had been in very bad…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Briggs v. SteeleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
  2. Commercial Credit Plan, Inc. v. ChandlerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1951
  3. Leonhard v. FloodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
  4. Cox v. Darragh CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1957
  5. Brooks v. BurgessSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1957

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