Ingalls v. Lee
New York Supreme Court
This was a case, submitted by the parties, pursuant to the first chapter of the twelfth title of the Code, subject to appeal Henry Hunt, being a merchant in Troy, sold out his stock of goods to Hayes “ $400. Troy, May 12, 1842. On the first day of September next I promise to pay Lee & King, or order, four hundred dollars for value received with interest, at the Troy City Bank.
Read the full summary
This was a case, submitted by the parties, pursuant to the first chapter of the twelfth title of the Code, subject to appeal Henry Hunt, being a merchant in Troy, sold out his stock of goods to Hayes “ $400. Troy, May 12, 1842. On the first day of September next I promise to pay Lee & King, or order, four hundred dollars for value received with interest, at the Troy City Bank. Henry Hunt.” « $600. Troy, May 12, 1842. Six months after date I promise to pay Lee & King, or order, six hundred dollars at the Troy City Bank, for value received with interest. Henry Hunt.” Payment of the notes was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Parker, J.
The notes in question, dated May 12,1842, were made in renewal of the note dated Aug. 9, 1841; and whether they are usurious, depends upon the previous transaction, by which the first note was transferred by Hunt to Cornell, after being indorsed by the defendants. Was that transaction a sale, or a loan? Unless it was a loan, there could be no usury.
The facts are brought before the court by a case agreed upon by the parties, under section 372 of the code. The facts, and not the evidence, are thus presented; and upon such facts the court has only to pronounce the law. I…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Brown v. MottNew York Supreme Court · 1811
- Mazuzan v. MeadNew York Supreme Court · 1839
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ludington v. KirkAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1896
- Roe v. SmythAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- Durant v. BantaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1858