Legal Opinion

Vary v. Norton

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Michigan

Decided January 15, 1881PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Assumpsit. Trial before tbe Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Withey, D. J.

Tbe suit is upon a promissory note. Defendants Norton, Lee, and King defend. Judgment by default against all tbe other defendants. King pleads sepa*809rately that the consideration of the note is in part usurious; that payments of interest base been usurious, and that he is the surety of Norton, and has been discharged from liability by the time of payment having been extended by plaintiff without his knowledge or consent. Norton and Lee join in their defence, which is the same in substance as set up by King. The note was made by all the defendants, at Lowell, in this state, March…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Smith v. SheldenMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  2. Hubbard v. . GurneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
  3. Jenness v. CutlerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1874
  4. Vilas & Bacon v. Jones & PiercyNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
  5. Harbert v. DumontIndiana Supreme Court · 1852

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Barney v. Tontine Surety Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Gillett v. TaylorUtah Supreme Court · 1896

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API