Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Patterson v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
277 A.2d 111 (1971)


Facts

Bernice Patterson (defendant) bought three items from the Walker-Thomas Furniture Company (Walker-Thomas) (plaintiff) under installment contracts. First, Patterson bought a television for roughly $300. The installment contract for the television said Patterson would pay Walker-Thomas $20 a month. Second, Patterson bought a dining-room set for about $100. This increased Patterson’s monthly payments to $24. Finally, Patterson bought wedding rings for almost $160, raising her monthly payments to $25. Patterson defaulted on her monthly payments after paying Walker-Thomas nearly $250 toward the approximate $600 Patterson owed for all three items. Walker-Thomas sued Patterson to recover the remaining balance. Patterson argued that she had already paid more than the fair value of the items. Patterson also raised the defense of unconscionability, arguing that Walker-Thomas’s prices were so unreasonably high that the installment contracts were unconscionable and, therefore, unenforceable under the Uniform Commercial Code. During the case, Patterson sought discovery information about Walker-Thomas’s pricing policies. Walker-Thomas objected, and Patterson asked the trial court to force Walker-Thomas to turn over the information. But the trial court would not force Walker-Thomas to provide the requested information. Instead, the trial court ruled that the information was irrelevant because the District of Columbia did not recognize a contractual defense of unconscionability based on allegations of overpricing. Because Patterson’s only defense was that the goods were unconscionably overpriced, the trial court then decided the entire case in favor of Walker-Thomas. Patterson appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Kelly, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 173,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.