Patterson v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
277 A.2d 111 (1971)
Relevant factsFree
Patterson (defendant) bought a television, dining set, and wedding rings from Walker-Thomas (plaintiff) under installment contracts totaling roughly $600, defaulted after paying about $250, and when sued for the balance raised the defense that the goods were unconscionably overpriced; she sought discovery of Walker-Thomas's pricing policies, but the trial court denied discovery, ruling the District did not recognize an unconscionability defense based on overpricing, and decided the case for Walker-Thomas since overpricing was Patterson's sole defense.
IssueFree
Whether the contractual defense of unconscionability may be based on an argument that goods were overpriced.
Related cases
Great Northern Oil Company v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company189 N.W.2d 404 (1971)George v. School District No. 8R490 P.2d 1009 (1971)Industrial America, Inc. v. Fulton Industries, Inc.285 A.2d 412 (1971)Karpinski v. Ingrasci268 N.E.2d 751 (1971)Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. Arroll322 N.Y.S.2d 420 (1971)