Crittenden v. Ragan
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the chancery- court of Washington county. Hon. Percy Bedd, Chancellor. Ragan and others, appellees, were complainants in the court below; O. B. Crittenden & Co., appellants, and the Geiss-Mann Hardware Company, an appellee, were defendants there. From a decree overruling the demurrer of defendants, 0. B. Crittenden & Co., to the bill of complaint, and to the cross-bill of defendant hardware company, 0. B. Crittenden & Co. appealed to-the supreme court.
Read the full summary
From the chancery- court of Washington county. Hon. Percy Bedd, Chancellor. Ragan and others, appellees, were complainants in the court below; O. B. Crittenden & Co., appellants, and the Geiss-Mann Hardware Company, an appellee, were defendants there. From a decree overruling the demurrer of defendants, 0. B. Crittenden & Co., to the bill of complaint, and to the cross-bill of defendant hardware company, 0. B. Crittenden & Co. appealed to-the supreme court. The appellee, Ragan, sued the appellants, Crittenden and others, composing the copartnership of 0. B. Crittenden & Company, and the…
1Opinion of the CourtWhitfield, C. J.
We think the bill sufficiently avers usury as to the discount of the notes, and the double charges therefor on the amount advanced Fuller. The trust deed recitals, taken in conjunction with the averments of the bill, show that Crittenden discounted the notes, which were for advances to be made, and placed the amount to the credit of Fuller, and that afterwards, when the advances were made, again charged ten per cent per annum on such advances; and the demurrer admits all this to be true. The other charges about usury and fraud are not sufficiently specific. The appellees’ bill also clearly…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Purvis v. WoodwardMississippi Supreme Court · 1901
3Cited by2 opinions
- Holmes v. BatesMississippi Supreme Court · 1953
- Rush v. PearsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1907