Legal Opinion

Mathews v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Trust Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 8, 1897No. Nos. 10,224—(70)PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for St. Louis county entered pursuant to findings by Ensign, J.

1Per curiam

Action to obtain a cancellation, for usury, of certain notes and the mortgage securing them, made by the plaintiffs to the defendant. The trial court found that the notes and mortgage were usurious, and directed their cancellation. Judgment was so entered, from which the defendant appealed.

1. The defendant claims that the judgment is erroneous, because the plaintiffs should have been required to do equity, and repay, with interest, the amount of money actually received by them from the defendant, as a condition of obtaining a cancellation of the securities. The statute law of our state2 is…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Trust Co. v. McLachlanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
  2. Missouri, K. & T. Trust Co. v. KrumseigCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1896
  3. Scott v. AustinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
  4. Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Travelers' Ins.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897
  5. Exley v. BerryhillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Trust Co. v. KrumseigSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  2. Trauernicht v. KingstonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
  3. Doyle v. American Loan Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
  4. First State Bank of Cheyenne v. FletcherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API