Legal Opinion
Bayne v. Jolley
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 4, 1964No. Civ. 7275PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BROWN (Gerald), J.
From a judgment for plaintiffs George and Lucy Bayne, decreeing that defendant Orwin H. Jolley had charged them usurious interest on a $50,000 loan and awarding $18,791.53 treble damages, defendant appeals.
Early in December 1960 Bayne sought to borrow $50,000 from Jolley and received a tentative commitment, which was later rescinded. Jolley suggested that Bayne procure the loan through the San Diego Mortgage Company, but in order to avoid paying a broker’s commission Bayne chose not to do so. Jolley’s daughter was employed as a broker for the Mortgage Company, and would…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Estate of Bristol v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Primm v. PrimmCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Haines v. Commercial Mortgage Co.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Thomas v. Hunt Manufacturing Corp.California Supreme Court · 1954
- Janisse v. Winston Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1957
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In the Matter of Vehm Engineering Corporation, Bankrupt. Baruch Investment Company, Dba Advance Industrial Finance Company and Trans-West Factors, Petitioners-Cross-Respondents-Appellants v. Curtis B. Danning, Trustee, Respondent-Cross-Petitioner-Appellee. Baruch Investment Company, Dba Advance Industrial Finance Company and Trans-West Factors, Petitioners-Cross-Respondents-Appellees v. Curtis B. Danning, Trustee, Respondent-Cross-Petitioner-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- T'Bear v. FormanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2019
- Baruch Investment Co. v. DanningCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975