Login

Login

To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library

Add

Search

Login
Register
Register

Jones v. Star Credit Corp

Law Dictionary
CASE BRIEFS

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
AA
Font size

Contracts Keyed to Murphy

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Citation. 22 Ill.59 Misc. 2d 189, 298 N.Y.S.2d 264 (Sup. Ct. 1969)

Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiffs, various welfare recipients (Plaintiffs), agreed to purchase a home freezer for $900. The Plaintiffs paid $619.88 towards the purchase. The Defendant, Star Credit Corp (Defendant), claimed that charges relating to the extension of time for payment results in a $819.81 still being due. The maximum retail value of the freezer is $300.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Section 2-302 of the Uniform Commercial Code, (UCC) “authorizes a court to find, as a matter of law, that a contract or a clause of a contract was ‘unconscionable at the time it was made,’ and upon so finding the court may refuse to enforce the contract, excise the objectionable clause or limit the application of the clause to avoid an unconscionable result.”


Facts. Plaintiffs, who are welfare recipients, agreed to purchase a home freezer for $900. The total purchase price became $1,234.80. Thus far, the Plaintiffs have paid $619.88 towards the purchase. Defendant claims that with various charges relating to the extension of time for payment, there is a balance of $819.81 still due. The maximum retail value of the freezer is $300.

Issue. Is the transaction unconscionable pursuant to the terms of UCC Section:2-302?

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following