limits to actions on oral agreements. A. As used in this section: 1. "Credit agreement" means an agreement by a financial institution to lend money, extend credit or otherwise make any other financial accommodation, or to renew, extend, modify, rearrange or forebear the repayment of any such loan, extension of credit or financial accommodation, but does not include any promissory note, real estate mortgage, or security agreement.
2. "Financial institution" means any bank, savings and loan association, or credit union, or any holding company or subsidiary thereof. 3. "Lender" means a financial institution that makes a credit agreement with a borrower. 4. "Borrower" means a person who seeks a credit agreement with a lender or financial institution as defined herein or to whom money is loaned, credit is extended, or any other financial accommodation is made or for whom any such loan, extension of credit or financial accommodation is renewed, extended, modified, rearranged or forborne by a lender or financial institution as defined herein. B. No lender or borrower may maintain an action to enforce or seek damages for the breach of any term or condition of credit agreement having a principal amount greater than Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00), unless such term or condition has been agreed to in writing and signed by the party against whom it is sought to be enforced or against whom damages are sought. C. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to preclude a lender from maintaining an action against a borrower, whether or not a credit agreement has been signed by the borrower, with respect to any of the following: 1. Credit extended on an "account", as such term is defined in Section 4-104 of Title 12A of the Oklahoma Statutes; or 2. Credit extended pursuant to a "lender credit card or similar arrangement" or a "revolving loan account", as such terms are defined, respectively, in Sections 1-301 and 3-108 of Title 14A of the Oklahoma Statutes, if the terms or conditions relevant thereto are in writing and are provided to the borrower prior to his usage of the card or account or otherwise in accordance with applicable law. D. The provisions of this section shall be effective with respect to credit agreements entered into after the effective date of this act. Added by Laws 1989, c. 148, § 1, emerg. eff. May 8, 1989.
Notes of Decisions
Brown v. Founders Bank & Trust Co., 890 P.2d 855 (Okla. 1994).
· cites it 14× “KAUGER, Judge: Three issues are presented: 1) whether, on appeal, a party must contest the procedural aspects of a motion to dismiss with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted to preserve substantive issues for review; 2) whether the requirement…”
Sees v. Bank One, Indiana, N.A., 839 N.E.2d 154 (Ind. 2005).
· cites it 2× “§ 45-1,113 (1990); Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 140 (1989); Utah Code § 25-5-4 (2004).”
Pease v. Wachovia SBA Lending, Inc., 6 A.3d 867 (Md. 2010).
· cites it 3× “Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 140 (B) (2010). 6 The same conclusion was reached in Connecticut, whose statute of frauds provides in relevant part: (a) No civil action may be maintained in the following cases unless the agreement, or a memorandum of the agreement, is made in writing and…”
DCR Fund I, LLC v. TS Fam. Ltd. P'ship, 261 F. App'x 139 (10th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 2× “On December 6, 2004, the district court granted the motion based primarily on its determination that any oral deferral agreement between Bank One and TTI was barred by Oklahoma’s credit agreement statute of frauds, Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 140 . The court also awarded summary…”
Big John's Lumber Co. of Muskogee, Inc. v. City Bank of Muskogee, 901 P.2d 832 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
· cites it 3× “Bank moved for summary judgment and contended: (1) 15 O.S.1991 § 140 precluded an action against a bank to enforce an oral agreement to lend money; (2) there was no consideration for the purported agreement; and, (3) the purported agreement was unenforceable because the approval…”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 140(B) — 1 case
Big John's Lumber Co. of Muskogee, Inc. v. City Bank of Muskogee, 901 P.2d 832 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
“Bank moved for summary judgment and contended: (1) 15 O.S.1991 § 140 precluded an action against a bank to enforce an oral agreement to lend money; (2) there was no consideration for the purported agreement; and, (3) the purported agreement was unenforceable because the approval…”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 140(C) — 1 case
Big John's Lumber Co. of Muskogee, Inc. v. City Bank of Muskogee, 901 P.2d 832 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
“Bank moved for summary judgment and contended: (1) 15 O.S.1991 § 140 precluded an action against a bank to enforce an oral agreement to lend money; (2) there was no consideration for the purported agreement; and, (3) the purported agreement was unenforceable because the approval…”
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.