Court Opinion

ID: 9527342
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:29:49.012314+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:44.575877
License: Public Domain

LIVINGSTON, Chief Justice,
and LAWSON, Justice (specially concurring).
We agree with the holding of the court to the effect that the demurrer was overruled without error. We are also in agreement with the court’s action in upholding the temporary injunction ordered by the trial court. However, our agreement on this phase of the case is grounded on the belief that the proof shows that the overall manner in which appellants have conducted their business constitutes a public nuisance subject to being enjoined by the equity courts of this state in a suit instituted on behalf of the State at the instance of the Attorney General.
We do not understand the court to hold that the charging and collection of interest in an amount in excess of that provided by law, standing alone, is sufficient to constitute a public nuisance subject to injunctive relief.