Over $14$ months, Perez signed five rent$-$to$-$own contracts with Rent$-$A$-$Center $($RAC$)$ to buy used furniture, a used washer, a new dryer, a new computer, a used DVD player and TV$,$ and a used large$-$screen TV and cabinet. Each contract said that $$this is a rental agreement only$$ and that ownership would not pass unless she had paid $$the total of rental payments plus the option payment necessary to acquire ownership.$$ The property had a cash value of $$9,301$ but if she wanted to purchase the items, the total payments would be $$18,613.$ The difference was the interest charged for the $$privilege of buying the products over time.$$ The range of interest on the items was between $79\mathrm{.}7$ percent and $82\mathrm{.}7$ percent. Perez stopped paying after she had made payments of $$8,156\mathrm{.}72.$ RAC sued her for the money damages and return of the items. She then filed her own suit alleging that the interest rate exceeded the state$$s usury statute. Who should win, and w