Legal Opinion
John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Houston
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided October 12, 1934No. 13025PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DUNKLIN,'Chief Justice.
The question to be determined in this case is whether or not the contracts involved were • tainted with usury.
On December 1, 1917, C. C. Houston, joined by his wife, Jennie B. Houston, executed their promissory note in favor of the Maxwell Investment Company for the principal; sum of $5,000, payable January 1, 1928, with interest thereon at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum according to the terms of nine-coupon notes attached to the principal note.. The first of those coupon notes was for the-smn of $325, payable on January 1, 1919.. Each of the other eight coupon notes…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Shropshire v. Commerce Farm Credit Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1930
- Shropshire v. Commerce Farm Credit Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1931
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. TodTexas Supreme Court · 1901
- Galveston & Houston Investment Co. v. GrymesTexas Supreme Court · 1901
- Mills v. JohnstonTexas Supreme Court · 1859
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Stacks v. Arkansas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
- Rich Mountain Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. RevelsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
- John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. HarrisonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
- Dodd v. Phœnix Mut. Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Warner v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1949
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.