Fay v. Grimsteed
New York Supreme Court
This was an appeal by Fay and Wilson to the general term of the court, from a judgment entered upon the direction of a single judge, upon a verdict rendered for the defendant.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal by Fay and Wilson to the general term of the court, from a judgment entered upon the direction of a single judge, upon a verdict rendered for the defendant. The appellants, ivho were plaintiffs in the suit, in their complaint, set forth a check drawn by the respondent, on the Long Island Bank, dated 4th of November, 1848, for $200; and his promissory note, dated 23d of December, 1848, payable to the order of the plaintiffs, four days after date, for $135 ; and demanded judgment for the amount thereof, with interest. The answer of the respondent, who was the defendant in the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Brown, J.
The counsel for the plaintiffs asked the court upon the trial of this cause, to charge the jury in substance, that unless they believed from the evidence that upon the loan of money represented by the note, there was an agreement to pay interest, of the exact character set up in the answer, the plaintiffs were entitled to recover. The judge re*329fused so to charge, and I think he was right. That the defendant was required in his answer to state the usurious agreement as it existed, will hardly be denied. There is no longer any such plea as the general issue, and there can…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Vroom v. DitmasNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
- Bank of Utica v. IvesNew York Supreme Court · 1837
3Cited by11 opinions
- Clark v. DalesNew York Supreme Court · 1855
- Finley v. QuirkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1864
- Pepper v. HaightNew York Supreme Court · 1854
- Ramme v. . Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Morris v. SlateryThe Superior Court of New York City · 1857
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.