Sec. 302.002. ACCRUAL OF INTEREST WHEN NO RATE SPECIFIED. If a creditor has not agreed with an obligor to charge the obligor any interest, the creditor may charge and receive from the obligor legal interest at the rate of six percent a year on the principal amount of the credit extended beginning on the 30th day after the date on which the amount is due. If an obligor has agreed to pay to a creditor any compensation that constitutes interest, the obligor is considered to have agreed on the rate produced by the amount of that interest, regardless of whether that rate is stated in the agreement.
Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 7.18(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999.
SUBCHAPTER B. OTHER RATES AND PROVISIONS ON LOANS SECURED BY REAL PROPERTY
Notes of Decisions
Walden v. Affiliated Comput. Servs., Inc., 97 S.W.3d 303 (Tex. App. 2003).
· cites it 6× “In 1999, the Legislature amended Texas Finance Code section 302.002 to delete the *330 language of former article 5069-1.”
Hoxie Implement Co., Inc. v. Baker, 65 S.W.3d 140 (Tex. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 302.002. Similarly clear is the fact that Hoxie demanded 18% per annum through the January 15th letter and attachment.”
Adams v. H & H Meat Prods., Inc., 41 S.W.3d 762 (Tex. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Interest Adams contends that in accordance with Texas Finance Code section 302.002, contract interest, absent agreement, is six percent.”
Clements v. Minnesota Life Ins. Co., 176 S.W.3d 258 (Tex. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “See Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 302.002. Likewise, we cannot hold that, under the facts of this case, the trial court abused its discretion in not awarding prejudgment interest to Clements under equitable principles.”
AU Pharm., Inc. v. Boston, 986 S.W.2d 331 (Tex. App. 1999).
· cites it 3× “*334 PREJUDGMENT INTEREST AU contends that the trial court erred in awarding six percent prejudgment interest pursuant to Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 302.002 (Vernon 1998), 1 effective September 1,1997, which reads as follows: When no specified rate of interest is agreed on by the…”
Smith v. Huston, 251 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 302.002 (Vernon 2006).”
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.