{
  "id": 1174945,
  "name": "TAURUS LEASING CORPORATION v. Jerry HOWARD d/b/a JERRY HOWARD, D.D.S. et al",
  "name_abbreviation": "Taurus Leasing Corp. v. Howard",
  "decision_date": "1981-04-20",
  "docket_number": "81-19",
  "first_page": "323",
  "last_page": "324",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "272 Ark. 323"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "614 S.W.2d 502"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "241 Ark. 36",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1724128
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1966,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/241/0036-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 177,
    "char_count": 1807,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.787,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.043287272732889064
    },
    "sha256": "2e684cb03af7a0d9102126fd48077009eaedaaf6bbf2f6b6374c6e2508bfeb57",
    "simhash": "1:9f9f4f8cad2ddff8",
    "word_count": 293
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:44:04.069601+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Holt, J., not participating."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "TAURUS LEASING CORPORATION v. Jerry HOWARD d/b/a JERRY HOWARD, D.D.S. et al"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Richard B. Adkisson, Chief Justice.\nAppellant, Taurus\nLeasing Corporation, brings this appeal from a summary judgment declaring void a written contract between it and appellee, Jerry Howard, as being usurious and made in violation of the Wingo Act, Ark. Stat. Ann. \u00a7 64-1201 et seq. (Repl. 1980); and, from a summary judgment granting the appellee, State of Arkansas, a money penalty against it for doing business in Arkansas in violation of the Wingo Act.\nSummary judgment is properly granted if the moving party has established of record that no genuine issue of material fact remains for trial. See Rule 56, Ark. Rules Civ. Proc., Ark. Stat. Ann., Vol. 3A (Repl. 1979); UPI v. Hernreich, 241 Ark. 36, 406 S.W. 2d 317 (1966).\nIn this case the trial court apparently granted summary judgment based upon conclusory allegations in the complaint and upon affidavits stating that a written contract for the sale and lease-back of office equipment had been entered into between appellant, a foreign corporation, and appellee, Howard, an Arkansas resident. However, we find no admitted allegations, supporting affidavits, or other proof of record from which the trial court could have found that the contract was made in Arkansas; therefore, the unresolved fact question of where the contract was made is one that remains for trial as to each matter upon which summary judgment was granted.\nReversed and remanded.\nHolt, J., not participating.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Richard B. Adkisson, Chief Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. J, Walker, for appellant.",
      "Overby, Moody & Peace, by: Edward O. Moody, and Wilbur C. Bentley, Pros. Atty., by: Hugh L. Brown and Larry Page, Deputy Pros. Attys., for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "TAURUS LEASING CORPORATION v. Jerry HOWARD d/b/a JERRY HOWARD, D.D.S. et al\n81-19\n614 S.W. 2d 502\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered April 20, 1981\n[Rehearing denied May 18, 1981.]\nW. J, Walker, for appellant.\nOverby, Moody & Peace, by: Edward O. Moody, and Wilbur C. Bentley, Pros. Atty., by: Hugh L. Brown and Larry Page, Deputy Pros. Attys., for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0323-01",
  "first_page_order": 341,
  "last_page_order": 342
}