Guggenheimer v. . Geiszler
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, affirming a judgment of Special Term in favor of defendants. This action was brought to foreclose a mortgage executed by defendant Geiszler and his wife, as collateral to their bond. The defense was usury. The facts appear sufficiently in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, affirming a judgment of Special Term in favor of defendants. This action was brought to foreclose a mortgage executed by defendant Geiszler and his wife, as collateral to their bond. The defense was usury. The facts appear sufficiently in the opinion. To sustain the defense of usury, there must not only be an agreement actually made between the parties for the payment of more than lawful interest, but there must be the intent to do so in violation of the statute against usury. This intent must…
1Opinion of the CourtDanforth, J.
Philip J. Seiter was the mortgagee, and the plaintiff claims under him. The transaction in question was between Seiter and Jolm Geiszler, one of the mortiras'ors. The latter, in April, 1872, owed Seiter upon two notes which then, with interest, amounted to $172.45. They were past due, and he was unable to pay them. They w.ere placed in the hands of one R., an attorney, for collection. Either Seiter proposed to make a loan to Geiszler of $1,500, or Geiszler applied for it, but both parties testify that the loan was agreed upon before the execution or preparation of the bond and mortgage, and…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Rosenstein v. . FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Brown v. . RobinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Garvin v. LintonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
- Morton v. . ThurberNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Continental Savings & Building Ass'n v. WoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.