Williams v. Hance
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from a decision of the vice chancellor of the fourth circuit. The bill was filed and an injunction obtained to restrain the defendants from proceeding, under the statute, to foreclose a mortgage given to them by the complainant ; which mortgage he alleged to be usurious.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decision of the vice chancellor of the fourth circuit. The bill was filed and an injunction obtained to restrain the defendants from proceeding, under the statute, to foreclose a mortgage given to them by the complainant ; which mortgage he alleged to be usurious. The defendants lived in New-York, and the complainant, who resided at Glen’s Falls, in the county of Warren, was indebted to them in the sum of about $746. One of the defendants applied to him at his place of residence for payment of the debt; and it was finally agreed between them that the defendants…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The vice chancellor was clearly right in supposing this mortgage was usurious, notwithstanding the denial of the defendants, in their answer, that they intended to violate the usury law. The respondent was neither legally nor equitably indebted to them for any part of the travelling expenses from New-York; and although he did, as they allege in their answer, voluntarily agree to pay the half of such expenses, it is evident that such agreement was in consideration of their forbearing payment of the real debt, for the term of three and four months. It was, therefore, a…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Harger v. McCulloughNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Barbour v. TompkinsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
- Oliver Lee Co's Bank v. . WalbridgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Townsend v. CorningNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Oliver Lee & Co's Bank v. WalbridgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.