Legal Opinion

Hill v. . Lindsay

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 25, 1936PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDevin, J.

While the record is voluminous, only two material questions are presented by this appeal.

1. Is the plaintiffs’ cause of action for usury barred by the statute of limitations ?

2. Are the plaintiffs prevented from pleading usury by reason of the execution of a new note for the balance due on previous transactions involving usury?

The parties having waived jury trial and consented that the court should find the facts, his findings, if supported by evidence, are conclusive. Od um v. Palmer, 209 N. C., 93; Buchanan v. Clark, 164 N. C., 56.

I. It is not controverted that the transactions between the…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Brown v. Marion National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. Buchanan v. . ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  3. Charles A. Riley Co. v. W. T. Sears & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  4. Lee v. . McKoySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  5. Armfield v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Henderson v. SECURITY MORTAGAGE AND FINANCE CO.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. NCCS Loans, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  3. Denton v. . VassiliadesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Merchants & Planters National Bank of Sherman v. AppleyardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. Duke University v. ChestnutCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API