Van Benschooten v. Lawson
New York Court of Chancery
BILL to foreclose a mortgage, given on the 12th of May, 1819, to secure the payment of a bond, conditioned to pay 9026 dollars and 87 cents, on the 12th of May, 1820, with interest.
Read the full summary
BILL to foreclose a mortgage, given on the 12th of May, 1819, to secure the payment of a bond, conditioned to pay 9026 dollars and 87 cents, on the 12th of May, 1820, with interest. It appeared in proof, that this bond and mortgage were given for the balance of two prior bonds, the one dated May 2d, 1814, for 4750 dollars, payable the 1st of May, 1815, with interest, and the other, dated the 27th of May, 1817, for 737 dollars, given for the arrears of interest remaining unpaid on the prior bond; and that on giving this last bond for 737 dollars, interest on the previous interest remaining…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
It is a well settled rule, and for which I may refer to the case of Connecticut v. Jackson, (1 Johns. Ch. Rep. 13.) and to the authorities there cited, that compound interest cannot lawfully be demanded and taken, except upon a special agreement, made after the interest has become due. It is, then, a debt due, and the creditor may insist upon immediate payment of it, or that the debtor should allow interest upon it, which is, in fact, turning the interest into principal. In the case of a mortgage security, it would be fair for the mortgagee, says Lord Ch. Manners, (1 Ball &…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State of Connecticut v.JacksonNew York Court of Chancery · 1814
3Cited by22 opinions
- Higgins v. LansinghIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Union Institution for Savings v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Genin v. IngersollWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1877
- Household Finance Corp. v. GoldringAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
- Meyer v. GraeberSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.