Briones v. Solomon
842 S.W.2d 278, 36 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 452, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 190, 1992 WL 387417
Opinion
A demand for postjudgment interest arises from the judicial process rather than directly from a commercial or consumer transaction, and is therefore not a “charging” under the usury laws. George A. Fuller Co. v. Carpet Services, Inc., 823 S.W.2d 603, 605 (Tex.1992). The court of appeals rendered the correct judgment because respondent presented the point that there was no charging of usurious interest. We neither approve nor disapprove any portion of the court of appeals opinion. 805 S.W.2d 916. Petitioner’s motion for rehearing is overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Briones v. Solomon, 842 S.W.2d 278, 36 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 452, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 190, 1992 WL 387417 (Tex. 1992).
842 S.W.2d 278 (Briones v. Solomon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Williams v. Bell
402 S.W.3d 28 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013)
Felicia Williams, Individually D/B/A in the Urban City Investment Group v. Destry C. Bell, Sr., and Christ Temple of Deliverance Church of God in Christ, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013
Hunt v. Baldwin
68 S.W.3d 117 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)