If it is ascertained in an action brought on a contract that a rate of interest has been
contracted for, directly or indirectly, in money or in property, greater than is authorized
by this chapter, the rate shall work a forfeiture of eight cents on the hundred by the year
upon the amount of the principal remaining unpaid upon the contract at the time judgment
is rendered, and the court shall enter final judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against
the defendant for the principal sum remaining unpaid without costs, and also against the
defendant and in favor of the state, to be paid to the treasurer of state for deposit in the
general fund of the state, for the amount of the forfeiture. If unlawful interest is contracted
for the plaintiff shall not have judgment for more than the principal sum, whether the
unlawful interest is incorporated with the principal or not.
[R60, §1791; C73, §2080; C97, §3041; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §9407; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71,
73, 75, 77, 79, S79, C81, §535.5]
83 Acts, ch 185, §52, 62; 83 Acts, ch 186, §10109, 10201, 10204
\n
Notes of Decisions
Muchmore Equip., Inc. v. Grover, 334 N.W.2d 605 (Iowa 1983).
· cites it 12× “Iowa Code § 535.5 . Accordingly, we conclude there is no inequity in our holding.”
Muchmore Equip., Inc. v. Grover, 315 N.W.2d 92 (Iowa 1982).
· cites it 6× “5 of the Code provides: If it shall be ascertained in any action brought on any contract that a rate of interest has been contracted for, directly or indirectly, in money or in property, greater than is authorized by this chapter, the same shall work a forfeiture of eight cents…”
Chapman's Golf Ctr. v. Chapman, 524 N.W.2d 422 (Iowa 1994).
· cites it 4× “The unlawful interest contracted for by Chapman according to Cole and Day would limit her judgment to the principal sum as a penalty exacted under Iowa Code section 535.5. A further application of section 535.”
Kaiser Agric. Chemicals, Inc. v. Peters, 417 N.W.2d 437 (Iowa 1987).
· cites it 6× “Iowa Code § 535.5 . We reverse the balance of the judgment and remand with instructions to the trial court for entry of judgment against Peters and in favor of the state of Iowa to be paid to the treasurer of the state for deposit in the general fund of Iowa for 8% of $23,738.”
CBS Real Est. of Cedar Rapids, Inc. v. Harper, 316 N.W.2d 170 (Iowa 1982).
· cites it 3× “After trial, the court found that the note was usurious and gave CBS judgment against defendant for $4231 principal, without interest, costs, or attorney fees; denied foreclosure; and entered judgment against Harper for 8% interest on $4231 for the Linn County school fund.”
Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Rand & Reed Powers P'ship, 972 F. Supp. 1194 (N.D. Iowa 1997).
· cites it 2× “2d 170, 174-75 (Iowa 1982) (recognizing that another statute in chapter 535, Iowa Code § 535.5 , could render usurious transactions pursuant to a contract not void, but unenforceable beyond the legal interest rate); Amana Soc’y v.”
Power Equip., Inc. v. Tschiggfrie, 460 N.W.2d 861 (Iowa 1990).
· cites it 2× “The fact that the notice of finance charge on a particular invoice may exceed the maximum amount allowable under the latter statutes shall not work a forfeiture under section 535.5. Such forfeiture is only applicable where the excessive finance charge “has been contracted for.”
Peterson v. Modjeska, 125 N.W.2d 751 (Iowa 1964).
· cites it 4× “Plaintiff's testimony is he gave Modjeska a check for $1376 and received the $2200 instrument shown in first paragraph.”
Rexing Quality Eggs v. Rembrandt Enter., Inc. (7th Cir. 2021).
· cites it 4× “As for Rembrandt’s counterclaim for interest and attor- neys’ fees, Rembrandt is correct that the parties’ agreement fell within the “Business Credit Exception” to Iowa’s usury statute, Iowa Code § 535.5 (2)(a)(5). We therefore reverse the district court’s denial of Rembrandt’s…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.