Talbot v. Sioux National Bank
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IOWA. This is an action brought in the District Court of Woodbury County, Iowa, under sections 5197 and 5198 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, relating to national banks, to recover the sum of $16,250, the amount of interest alleged to have .been unlawfully charged and collected by the defendant bank.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IOWA. This is an action brought in the District Court of Woodbury County, Iowa, under sections 5197 and 5198 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, relating to national banks, to recover the sum of $16,250, the amount of interest alleged to have .been unlawfully charged and collected by the defendant bank. It was argued with No. 161, ante, 171. The original petition alleged as follows: “ The plaintiff claims of the defendants, and each of them, the sum of $16,000, as money justly due plaintiff from defendants, on account of unlawful and…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKenna
1. A motion is made to dismiss on the ground that the record presents no Federal question. The motion is overruled.. Plaintiff claimed a right under sections 5197 and 5198 of the Revised Statutes, and the decisions of the courts of the State were adverse to such right. Sec. 709, Revised Statutes.
2. The demurrer of defendant in error was sustained because the action was not “ commenced within two years from the time the usurious transaction occurred.” This ruling was indubitably right if any date mentioned in the petition be that of the usurious transaction or transactions relied on. The…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Everett A. R. Searl, Pearl A. Searl v. Donald M. EarllCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1954
- Daniel H. Talbot, Plff. In Err. v. Sioux National Bank of Sioux City, IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1902