Kellogg v. Hickok
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit on four promissory notes, tried at the Onondaga circuit, in September, 1827, before the Hon. Enos T. Throop, one of the circuit judges. On the trial of the cause, the making of the notes was proved.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit on four promissory notes, tried at the Onondaga circuit, in September, 1827, before the Hon. Enos T. Throop, one of the circuit judges. On the trial of the cause, the making of the notes was proved. The defendant then produced an account-current stated by the plaintiff, shewing a balance of §2643 85, with a receipt thereto attached, for the notes declared on, of the same date with the notes; which account was made up as follows: On the22d November, 1819, the defendant was charged with a bill of goods amounting to §2211 49, and after-charging interest and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
The simple question is, whether notes given for the balance of an account, on which account interest has been cast annually, and added to the principal, are usurious.
Compound interest has nothing to do with the question of usury. It is illegal upon a different principle. Interest an. nually compounded, and added to the principal, does not give *522the creditor more than seven per cent, per annum for his money; and unless a rate of interest greater than that be taken, there is no usury.
In Ord on Usury, 36, it is said, that it is not illegal to stipulate for compound…
2Cited by26 opinions
- Young v. . HillNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Stewart v. . PetreeNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Crider v. San Antonio Real Estate, Building & Loan Ass'nTexas Supreme Court · 1896
- Mills v. Town of JeffersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
- Hollingsworth v. DetroitU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Michigan · 1844
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.