Legal Opinion
Watt v. First National Bank
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 9, 1899No. Nos. 11,566—(125)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
Action in the district court for Lincoln county to recover $323,. being twice the amount of interest paid on a promissory note alleged to be usurious. The case was tried before Webber, J., and a jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $321.94. From an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appealed. Affirmed.
1Opinion of the Court
MITCHELL, J.1
This action was brought under the national banking act, R. S. (U. S.) §§ 5197, 5198, which provides:
“Sec. 5197. Any association may take, receive, reserve and charge-on any loan or discount made, or upon any note, bill of exchange or other evidences of debt, interest at the rate' allowed by the laws of the state, territory or district where the bank is located, and no-more.
“Sec. 5198. The taking, receiving, reserving or charging a rate of interest greater than is allowed bv the preceding section, when knowingly done, shall be deemed a forfeiture of the entire interest which the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hintermister v. . First National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Louisville Trust Co. v. Kentucky Nat. BankU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky · 1898
- Bobo v. People's National BankTennessee Supreme Court · 1893
- Hill v. National Bank of BarreDistrict Court, D. Vermont · 1883
3Cited by4 opinions
- Baum v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1909
- Waldner v. Bowden State BankNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
- Ardmore State Bank v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Watt v. First National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900