Court Opinion

ID: 9830925
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:38:01.984956+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:28.401404
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In our, original opinion herein we affirmed the judgniént of the trial court upon two grounds: (1) That the loan involved, which was similar to that involved in Walker v. Temple Trust Company (Tex. Civ. App.) 60 S.W.(2d) 826, was not usurious; and (2) because Walker, who purchased the property and assumed the debt against it by a new contract in a stipulated amount, could not, after having done so, assert the usury, if any, In the original transaction; the latter holding being based on our conclusions announced in Moore v. Temple Trust Company (Tex. Civ. App.) 60 S.W.(2d) 828, 829.
Applications for writs of error were made in both of the above cases. The Supreme Court granted a writ in the Walker Case, but refused a writ in the Moore Case. In view of- these circumstances, therefore, we base our affirmance of this case upon the grounds stated in Moore v. Temple Trust Company, supra, and not' as stated in our original opinion, upon the grounds set forth in Walker v. Temple Trust Company, supra. Based upon our second ground stated in the original opinion rendered herein, therefore, appellants’ motion- for rehearing is overruled.
Overruled. •