Snead v. Groover
Alabama Court of Appeals
Appeal from Marshall Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. W. W. HARALSON. Action by W. E. Snead against J. R. Groover and another. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. The facts sufficiently appear.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Marshall Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. W. W. HARALSON. Action by W. E. Snead against J. R. Groover and another. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. The facts sufficiently appear. The following charges were given for defendant: (1) If you find from a consideration of the evidence that Snead acted as president of the Bank of Boaz, and as an individual and with a full knowledge of the usury and illegality of the contract, and made the loan of the money testified to for the purpose and with the intent of defeating the defense of usury and of depriving Groover of the…
1Opinion of the Court
BROWN, J.(1) While plea 1 is essentially a plea denying the plaintiff’s ownership of the note, and should have been sworn to, no objection was made to the plea, and the joinder of issue without objection waived the defect. — Milligan v. Pollard, 112 Ala. 465, 20 South. 620.
Pleas 4 and 5 allege, in substance, that the solé consideration of the note is usurious interest charged on a loan made by the Bank of Boaz to the defendants, and that plaintiff, the president of the bank, as a subterfuge, and for the purpose of evading the law and cutting off the defense of usury, took the note in his own…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Milligan v. PollardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- May v. FolsomSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896