Dow v. Drew
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, for money had and received. The cause was tried here, at September term, 1823, upon the general issue ; when it appeared in evidence, that the defendant, on the 25th December, 1815, loaned to the plaintiffs $400, for which he received their promissory note, payable in five years, with interest. That on the 13th November, 1821, the plaintiffs paid the defendant $200 ; and on the 5th November, 1822, $886 02, and took up the note.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, for money had and received. The cause was tried here, at September term, 1823, upon the general issue ; when it appeared in evidence, that the defendant, on the 25th December, 1815, loaned to the plaintiffs $400, for which he received their promissory note, payable in five years, with interest. That on the 13th November, 1821, the plaintiffs paid the defendant $200 ; and on the 5th November, 1822, $886 02, and took up the note. When the note was taken up, the defendant insisted upon being allowed compound interest, to which the plaintiffs objected ; but eventually paid the amount…
1Opinion of the CourtTtichaRDson, C. J.
The question in this case is, -whether, when compound interest has been paid voluntarily for a loan of money, an action can be maintained to recover back the amount paid above simple interest ?
On the part of the plaintiffs, it is contended, that the action may be maintained on the ground, that the receiving of eompound interest is illegal.
*41It is true, that courts do not in general allow compound interest. 17 Mass. Rep. 417, Dean vs. Williams.—1 Binney 165.—1 John. 137.
But it is very clear, that they do not refuse to allow it, because it is illegal ; for in many cases, where it is reserved by…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dean v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1821
- Peirce v. RoweSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1818