Legal Opinion · Dissent

McGalliard v. Liberty Leasing Co. of Alaska, Inc.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1975No. 2003Published

1DissentBoochever, Justice

Although I can agree with a great deal of the majority opinion, I dissent for the reason that I believe the case should be remanded to the trial court for a determination of factual issues as to whether the lease is subject to the usury law. I also would place a different emphasis on some of the considerations set forth by the majority in determining those issues.

This case presents a difficult question concerning the applicability of Alaska’s usury statute, AS 45.45.010 et seq. to a relatively modern commercial leasing agreement. The fundamental question here is whether the agreement between…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Hare v. General Contract Purchase Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
  2. Hafer v. SpaethWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Sloan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1957
  4. State v. J. C. Penney Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Peco, Inc. v. Hartbauer Tool & Die Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1972

10 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