Also known as: refunds · refunding · repayment
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
Money returned to a payer upon rescission or adjustment of a transaction or satisfaction of a contingent repayment obligation.
Roland Rhodes, an attorney, advances court filing fees and expert witness expenses for client Roger Ramirez in a personal injury suit. The retainer agreement states that repayment of the advances is contingent on a favorable outcome. When Roger obtains a settlement, he refunds the advanced amounts to Roland from the proceeds.
Rising Sun Electronics sells a batch of smartphones to Rachel Ramirez under a contract that limits remedies to return of the goods and repayment of the price. Upon discovering manufacturing defects, Rachel returns the phones. Rising Sun Electronics issues a full refund of the purchase price to Rachel.
Robert Rivera executes an absolute deed transferring title to his farm to Radiance Media as security for a loan. The deed is intended only as security. Upon full repayment of the debt, Radiance Media refunds title by reconveying the farm to Robert Rivera.
Radiant Technologies mortgages its manufacturing equipment to secure repayment of a bank loan. The board approves the mortgage without shareholder vote because it dedicates assets to the repayment of indebtedness. The mortgage remains valid and permits refund of the encumbered assets upon repayment.
Riverside Healthcare lends funds to Ravi Reddy and takes a security interest in his equipment to ensure repayment. The corporation receives and holds the equipment as collateral. Upon Ravi's repayment of the loan, Riverside Healthcare releases the security interest and refunds any excess collateral value.
Rina Rahman pays federal income taxes and later challenges the constitutionality of a federal expenditure program funded by those taxes. She files suit seeking a refund of her prior tax payment on the ground that the expenditure violates constitutional limits. The court considers whether her status as a taxpayer confers standing to pursue the refund claim.
Congress enacted the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. That statute authorized federal grants under Titles I and II to state and local educational agencies. Seven individuals who paid federal income taxes filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. They sued the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Commissioner of Education in their official capacities. The complaint alleged that federal funds appropriated under the Act were being disbursed with the consent and approval of the defendants. Those funds were being used to finance instruction in reading, arithmetic, and other subjects in religious schools and to purchase textbooks and instructional materials for use in such schools. The complaint attacked the specific criterion of 20 U.S.C. § 241e(a)(2) that to the extent consistent with the number of educationally deprived children in the school district of the local educational agency who are enrolled in private elementary and secondary schools, such agency has made provision for including special educational services and arrangements in which such children can participate. The plaintiffs alleged that these expenditures constituted compulsory taxation for religious purposes in violation of the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment. They requested a declaratory judgment that the expenditures were unauthorized or alternatively that the Act was unconstitutional to that extent together with an injunction restraining approval of further expenditures for the challenged purposes. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked standing. A three-judge district court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint. The plaintiffs appealed directly to the Supreme Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1253 and the Court noted probable jurisdiction.
View caseA lawyer may advance court costs and expenses of litigation under an agreement that makes repayment contingent on the outcome of the matter. This arrangement is permitted even though the lawyer provides financial assistance connected to the litigation.
An agreement may limit the buyer's remedies to return of the goods and repayment of the price. When the remedy is exclusive, the buyer obtains a refund of the price upon returning the goods rather than pursuing other damages.
When the grantor repays the debt secured by an absolute deed, the grantee must reconvey the property. The deed functions only as security, so repayment restores full title to the grantor.
A corporation may mortgage or otherwise encumber its assets to dedicate them to the repayment of indebtedness without shareholder approval, whether or not the transaction occurs in the usual course of business.
…C. § 405 (g). : The Secretary may reduce other payments to which the beneficiary is entitled, or seek the payment of a refund, unless the beneficiary is "without fault" and such adjustment or recovery would defeat the purposes of the Act or be "against equity and good conscience." 42 U. S. C. § 404 (b). See…