Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 779 S.W.2d 61 - Allee v. Benser

Allee v. Benser’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
July 2008
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2008

4 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

70198819902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas))

Relationships

Relies on Houston Sash and Door Co., Inc. v. Heaner · Adleson v. B. F. Dittmar Co. · Palmetto Lumber Co. v. Gibbs · Hemphill v. Watson · 2 Tex. Civ. App. 494 - Johnston v. Lasker Real Estate Ass'n

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The Legislature shall have authority to classify loans and lenders, license and regulate lenders, define interest and fix maximum rates of interest; provided, however, in the absence of legislation fixing maximum rates of interest all contracts for a greater rate of interest than ten per cen-tum (10%) per annum shall be deemed usurious; provided, further that in contracts where no rate of interest is agreed upon, the rate shall not exceed six per centum (6%) per annum....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Since a constitutional provision still expressly condemns usury, if the renewal contract were to collect usurious interest, that portion of the contract would be illegal and void. We do not decide and expressly do not preclude the [junior lienholder] from asserting on remand that constitutionally void usurious interest was collected that must be applied against the principal indebtedness of the note_The present state of the [junior lienholder’s] pleadings would not allow such a remedy, so we do not decide either whether such a “common law” usury doctrine is viable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The legal rate of interest shall not exceed eight per cent, per annum, in the absence of any contract as to the rate of interest; and by contract parties may agree upon any rate not to exceed twelve per cent, per annum. All interest charged above this last named rate, shall be deemed usurious, and the Legislature shall, at its first session, provide appropriate pains and penalties to prevent and punish usury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.