Boyd v. Head’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 2000
6 state decisions
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.
Relationships
Relies on International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. Anderson · Stearns v. Williams · 137 Cal. App. 2d 41 - Martyn v. Leslie · 38 Cal. 2d 770 - Klett v. Security Acceptance Co. · Meridian Bowling Lanes, Inc. v. Brown
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Examination of this court’s opinions dealing with usury reveals that the present action is the first in which we have been asked to determine whether an ostensibly separate commercial transaction entered simultaneously and with reference to a loan agreement has tainted the loan with usury. Because of the obviously delicate nature of this question and because this court ‘will never hesitate to pierce a devious device or form which seeks to circumvent the usury law,’ we have studied the record closely and have searched extensively for pertinent authority. We have discovered no case involving a transaction identical to that of present concern, but several courts have passed upon essentially similar transactions. “The common principle emerging from these opinions may be summarized: the collateral transaction does not taint the loan with usury if the transaction is entered without usurious intent and is supported by an adequate or fair consideration separate and distinct from the loan agreement. Thus, the courts have investigated the collateral transaction between the borrower and lender to determine if it contained a ‘fair price * * * full compensation [and] * * * equivalent benefit,’ if it was ‘not unfavorable’ to the borrower but rather was ‘mutually beneficial,’ and if it was supported by independent consideration which was ‘ample,’ ‘adequate and commensurate.’ * * * If the agreement benefits equivalently the borrower and the lender, the courts when determining whether the ac”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In circumstances where an order for specific performance would operate to benefit the petitioner inequitably and unconscionably, a court of equity has discretion to refuse to order specific performance or where possible to condition an order for specific performance so as to account for the petitioner’s inequitable conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the courts have investigated the collateral transaction between the borrower and lender to determine ... if it was supported by independent consideration which was ... 'adequate and commensurate'”
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.