Missouri Revised Statutes
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 362.195 (2026)
Applicability of sections 362.180 to 362.195
✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
362.195. Applicability of sections 362.180 to 362.195. — No law of this state prescribing the nature, amount or form of security, or requiring security upon which loans or advances of credit may be made, or prescribing or limiting interest rates upon loans or advances of credit, or prescribing or limiting the period for which loans or advances of credit may be made, shall apply to loans, advances of credit, or purchases made pursuant to sections 362.180 to 362.195.
--------
(RSMo 1939 § 8192)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1971–1991 · leading case: Gershman Inv. Corp. v. Danforth, 517 S.W.2d 33 (Mo. 1974).
Gershman Inv. Corp. v. Danforth, 517 S.W.2d 33 (Mo. 1974). “Gershman Investment Corporation seeks a declaration: (1) that two opinions of the Attorney General (in which the Attorney General expressed his belief that § 362.195, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S., is unconstitutional) are erroneous and should be ordered withdrawn; and (2) that § 362.”
Am. Civil Liberties Union/E. Missouri Fund v. Miller, 803 S.W.2d 592 (Mo. 1991). “[11] This case, dealing with opinions of the Attorney General issued pursuant to § 362.195, RSMo 1986, dealt with an opinion prepared by the present writer.”
Gershman Inv. Corp. v. Danforth, 475 S.W.2d 36 (Mo. 1971). “In this declaratory judgment action plaintiff, for itself and others similarly situated, sought a judgment declaring that certain opinions of the defendant Attorney General which ruled that § 362.195 1 is unconstitutional are erroneous and further declaring that said statute “is…”
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.