California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Harbor Island Holdings v. Kim, 107 Cal.App.4th 790, 132 Cal.Rptr.2d 406 (Cal. App. 2003):
This type of circular reasoning was expressly rejected in Ridgley v. Topa Thrift & Loan Assn., supra, 17 Cal.4th 970, 73 Cal.Rptr.2d 378, 953 P.2d 484. There, the court exposed the double talk of a "conditional waiver" of certain prepayment charges in a loan agreement. "A forfeiture or unreasonable penalty, imposed only upon the other party's default, is unenforceable even though the same money,
[107 Cal.App.4th 799]
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.