Mencor Enterprises, Inc. v. Hets Equities Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• viewing California’s interest in enforcing its usury laws as strong but not so fundamental as to dispense with a choice of law clause where the parties chose a state related to the contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Nedlloyd Lines B v. v. Superior Court
  California Supreme Court· 1992-08-31· cited 363×
• In Re Rexplore, Inc. Securities Litigation
  N.D. California· 1988-02-26· cited 39×
• Stonewall Surplus Lines Insurance v. Johnson Controls, Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 1993-03-24· cited 37×
• Omstead v. Dell, Inc.
  N.D. California· 2007-02-13· cited 6×
• Airs Aromatics, LLC v. CBL Data Recovery Tech. Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 2020-06-19
• G Companies Management, LLC v. LREP Arizona LLC
  California Court of Appeal· 2023-02-15

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Muggill v. Reuben H. Donnelley Corp.
  California Supreme Court· 1965-01-19· cited 105×
• Frame v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 1971-10-19· cited 60×
• Gamer v. duPont Glore Forgan, Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 1976-12-24· cited 43×
• Ury v. Jewelers Acceptance Corp.
  California Court of Appeal· 1964-04-30· cited 25×