Kitchel v. . Schenck

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] The plaintiff derives title to the note from the Auburn Exchange Bank, and if that bank could maintain an action upon it, the plaintiff is entitled to recover in this suit. The bank discounted it in the usual course of business, for Schenck, the maker, and knew nothing respecting the transaction between Schenck and Hyde. If the defence of usury can be sustained, it must be because the note had a legal inception in the hands of Hyde before it was offered to the…