Wilmot v. Monson
Supreme Court of Connecticut
MOTION for a new trial. . This was an action qui tam on the statute against usury. The corrupt agreement, and the taking in pursuance thereof, were thus alleged: “ That at New-Haven, on the 8th of January, 1807, it was corruptly agreed by and between the defendant and one Moses Wheeler, that he the defendant would loan to said Wheeler the sum of eight hundred dollars, for the term of sixty or sixty-three days; and he the said Wheeler then and there usu-riously and corruptly…
Read the full summary
MOTION for a new trial. . This was an action qui tam on the statute against usury. The corrupt agreement, and the taking in pursuance thereof, were thus alleged: “ That at New-Haven, on the 8th of January, 1807, it was corruptly agreed by and between the defendant and one Moses Wheeler, that he the defendant would loan to said Wheeler the sum of eight hundred dollars, for the term of sixty or sixty-three days; and he the said Wheeler then and there usu-riously and corruptly agreed with the defendant to pay, for the use and loan thereof, for the term of sixty or sixty-three days aforesaid, the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
In actions qui tarn, to recover the penalty on the statute entitled “ An act for restraining the taking of excessive usury,” when the plaintiff sets out in his tjeclaration the contract specifically, on which he alleges the usurious sum to have been received, he must prove the contract precisely as set out. In this case, the evidence offered by the plaintiff, in support of his declaration, went to prove a contract variant from the contract set out, and did not support the issue : and it was proper so to instruct the jury.
New trial not to be granted.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Osborne v. FultonIndiana Supreme Court · 1822