Schroeppel v. . Corning
New York Court of Appeals
* Appeal from the general term of the Su- |- * -^g preme Court, in the fifth district, where ajudg- L ment of nonsuit had been affirmed. (Reported below, 10 Barb. 576.) This wa s an action of assumpsit to recover an excess of money alleged to have been received by the defendant, beyond the principal and legal interest, upon a loan of money claimed to have been made to the plaintiff, Schroeppel.
Read the full summary
* Appeal from the general term of the Su- |- * -^g preme Court, in the fifth district, where ajudg- L ment of nonsuit had been affirmed. (Reported below, 10 Barb. 576.) This wa s an action of assumpsit to recover an excess of money alleged to have been received by the defendant, beyond the principal and legal interest, upon a loan of money claimed to have been made to the plaintiff, Schroeppel. The other plaintiff, Soule, was joined as the general assignee of Schroeppel, for the benefit of his ■ creditors. In 1837, the defendant had money which he said he could or would loan, and also' some…
1ConcurrencePaige, J.
(Dissenting.) — The evidence in this case was sufficient to entitle the plaintiffs to have the question of usury submitted to the jury. If the real character of the agreement was a loan, and the taking of the lands was imposed as a condition of the loan, the whole transaction was tainted with usury; and the assignment of the three bonds and mortgages to the defendant, as well as the bond and mortgage of Schroeppel, were void. (19 Johns. 509.) The loan of the money, the execution of the bond and mortgage of Schroeppel, the assignment of the three bonds and mortgages, and the sale of the land,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Pratt v. AdamsNew York Court of Chancery · 1839
- McKnight v. DunlopNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Schroeppel v. CorningNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Wheaton v. HibbardNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Rice v. KingNew York Supreme Court · 1810
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.