Quik Payday, Inc. v. Stork

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that payday loans extended to Kansas borrowers from Utah were not wholly extraterritorial and therefore Kansas regulation thereof was not prohibited under the Dormant Commerce Clause
• holding that a loan transaction is not “wholly extraterritorial” and thus not problematic under the dormant Commerce Clause where the “transfer of loan funds to the borrower would naturally be to a bank in [the consumer’s state]”
• noting that a Kansas statute applied only to loans involving borrowers who were physically present in Kansas
• finding that Kansas could regulate Utah lender’s loans to Kansas residents despite lender’s lack of physical presence in Kansas, because lending to Kansas residents constituted in-state activity
• upholding the application of a Kansas consumer-lending law to loans from an out-of-state nonbank lender to Kansas residents
• stating that even if a Kansas resident applied for a loan on a computer outside of Kansas, other aspects of the transaction would very likely occur in Kansas, “notably, the transfer of loan funds to the borrower would naturally be to a bank in Kansas”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).