Legal Opinion

Babcock v. Farmers' & Drovers' Bank

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 15, 1891PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error from, Kingman District Court. The opinion states the material facts.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Green, C.:

The Farmers’ and Drovers’ Bank sued the plaintiffs in error in the district court of Kingman county, upon a promissory note for $1,776.50. S. G. Babcock answered, admitting the execution of the note, and set up tbe affirmative defense that the note was void for want of consideration; that he had, at different times and in different sums, borrowed money from the Farmers’ and Drovers’ Bank, and had agreed to pay usurious interest for the use of the money so borrowed ; that the whole sum of such usurious interest agreed to be paid by him amounted to the sum stated in the note…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Scott v. MorningSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. White v. GemenySupreme Court of Kansas · 1892
  2. Baker v. L. C. Van Ness & Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  3. Benicia Agricultural Works v. Creighton & QuiveyOregon Supreme Court · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API