Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Van Asperen v. Darling Olds, Inc., 93 N.W.2d 690.
-
Melbo v. Rinn
157 N.W.2d 842
Minn. 1968
If upon a new trial it appears that the sales to Rinn and Shank reflected a bona fide time price differential, and there was in fact one price for cash and another for credit, under our decisions in Dunn v. Midland Loan Finance Corp. 206 Minn. 550 , , and Van Asperen v. Darling Olds, Inc. 254 Minn. 62 , 93 N. W. (2d) 690 , the sales were not usurious.