Briones v. Solomon
This text of 842 S.W.2d 278 (Briones v. Solomon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
842 S.W.2d 278, 36 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 452, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 190, 1992 WL 387417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/briones-v-solomon-tex-1992.