{
  "id": 1652966,
  "name": "Murdock Acceptance Corporation v. Higgins",
  "name_abbreviation": "Murdock Acceptance Corp. v. Higgins",
  "decision_date": "1953-05-11",
  "docket_number": "5-76",
  "first_page": "140",
  "last_page": "141",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "222 Ark. 140"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "258 S.W.2d 558"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "258 S. W. 2d 551",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        1653068
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/222/0127-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "220 Ark. 601",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1660015
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/220/0601-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "220 Ark. 56",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1660063
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/220/0056-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 212,
    "char_count": 2187,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.497,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.676830387708631e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3546907561019967
    },
    "sha256": "36c8cdd39ca29a1ad580e2edc858c25773b40ab1f4a74d2b32c69f55eedc293b",
    "simhash": "1:460f7f8e20a543be",
    "word_count": 366
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:48:42.003901+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Murdock Acceptance Corporation v. Higgins."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Griffin Smith, Chief Justice.\nThe Chancellor found that usury was involved when G. C. Ring and Lester Stewart, doing business as Ring & Stewart Motor Co., sold a used automobile to Frances Higgins. She received $140 as credit for an old car she had purchased for the same amount. A check for $160 was given to increase the down payment to $300, leaving $855 to be paid in fifteen monthly installments of $57. No interest is indicated and the contract (executed on a Murdock form) recites a \u201ctotal time price\u201d of $1,155.\nRing testified that he prepared the conditional sales contract the morning of October 2, 1951, and delivered it in duplicate to Mrs. Higgins at her home where the original and a copy were immediately executed and returned to Mm, the purchaser retaining the second sheet. Mrs. Higgins admitted that the signature was hers, but denied signing the contract October 2d. It was her recollection that the documents were signed not earlier than Oct. 6 and not later than the 19th. But Ring testified that he sold the paper to Murdock Oct. 2d, and that company\u2019s records and other evidence appear to sustain this contention.\nImmediately preceding Mrs. Higgins\u2019 signature there is a single line of clear type with substantial spacing above and below to separate it from what is sometimes referred to as \u201cconfusing small print\u201d. It reads: \u201cExecuted in duplicate, one copy of which was delivered to and retained by purchaser, THIS 2d DAT of Oct., 1951\u201d. The words \u201cthis\u201d and \u201cday\u201d were in blackface all-capital letters. Likewise \u201cTOTAL TIME PRICE\u201d, was in blackface, all-caps., followed by $1,155.\nAppellee relies upon Schuck v. Murdock Acceptance Corporation, 220 Ark. 56, 247 S. W. 2d 1, while appellant contends that its contract comes within the scope of Hare v. General Contract Corporation, 220 Ark. 601, 249 S. W. 2d 973.\nThe appeal is controlled by Crisco v. Murdock Acceptance Corporation, ante, p. 127, 258 S. W. 2d 551.\nReversed,",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Griffin Smith, Chief Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Lowell W. Taylor and Owens, Ehrman <& McHaney, for appellant.",
      "Oarl Langston and Wayne Foster, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Murdock Acceptance Corporation v. Higgins.\n5-76\n258 S. W. 2d 558\nOpinion delivered May 11, 1953.\nRehearing denied June 22, 1953.\nLowell W. Taylor and Owens, Ehrman <& McHaney, for appellant.\nOarl Langston and Wayne Foster, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0140-01",
  "first_page_order": 164,
  "last_page_order": 165
}