Court Opinion

ID: 9827385
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 17:29:01.401697+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:30.017279
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellees cite BranifC Inv. Co. v. Robertson,. 81 S.W. (2d) 45, by our Supreme Court (not yet published [in State Report]). That opinion holds that a note set up like this one at bar, in so far as the interest being computed into the installments agreed on without any rate of interest being stipulated, is saved, from usury by a provision of the deed of trust that upon acceleration, the payments shall be applied to accrued interest at 10- per cent, as of the date of payment and the balance to the payment of principal. The obligation involved in this ease has no such saving clause.
We regard the BranifC opinion as authority for our decision, in that it held that except for such saving clause, the note would have-been usurious.
The motion is overruled.