Legal Opinion

Hollis v. Swift & Son

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 2, 1885PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Interest and Usury. Factors. Before Judge Willis. Taylor Superior Court. August Term, 1884. To the report contained in the decision, it is only neces-' sary to add that the note sued on, and which was claimed to be usurious, was as follows : “ By the first day of October next, we, or either of us, promise to pay Geo.

Read the full summary

Interest and Usury. Factors. Before Judge Willis. Taylor Superior Court. August Term, 1884. To the report contained in the decision, it is only neces-' sary to add that the note sued on, and which was claimed to be usurious, was as follows : “ By the first day of October next, we, or either of us, promise to pay Geo. P. Swift & Son fifty-four dollars, at their office in Columbus, Georgia, advanced on crops, with interest at and after maturity at the rate of twelve per cent per annum until paid, for value received. Five dollars of the above amount may be discharged upon the delivery to said…

1Opinion of the Court

Hall, Justice.

The note upon which this suit was brought appears to have been given for a balance due the plaintiffs on two previous notes. The defence set up was usury in the original notes, which was also in this given in renewal and continuation of them. Each of the original notes, as well as *597this, contained a stipulation that one dollar for every ten dollars of the principal sum might be discharged upon delivery io the payees, who were warehousemen and commission merchants, of one bale of cotton, on which they were to have their, usual storage, commissions, etc. This note was for…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Owings v. Norwood's LesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1809

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bank of Lumpkin v. Farmers State BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
  2. Dwelle & Daniel v. BlackwoodSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  3. MacKenzie v. Garnett, Stubbs & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1886
  4. Callaway v. Butler & StephensSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
  5. Commission Co. v. Carroll & McCallumTennessee Supreme Court · 1900

1 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