Legal Opinion

New Jersey Patent Tanning Co. v. Turner

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided May 15, 1862PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Tub Chancellor.

The bill is filed to foreclose a mortgage for $5000, given by Turner and wife to Michael Righter, assigned by him (on the sixth of July, 1854,) to Robert Dod, and by Dod assigned to the complainants.

The defence is usury. The mortgagor, by his answer admitting the execution of the bond and mortgage, denies that he was indebted to Righter in $5000, or in any other sum, at the time of the execution of the mortgage, but states, that being in want of money, and wishing to procure a loan, he applied to one Stille Manning for a loan of $5000; that Manning told him he thought the money…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Vroom v. DitmasNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
  2. New-Orleans Gas Light & Banking Co. v. DudleyNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
  3. Catlin v. GunterThe Superior Court of New York City · 1852
  4. Curtis v. MastenNew York Court of Chancery · 1844
  5. Gould v. HornerNew York Supreme Court · 1852

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mooney v. PetnickNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1929

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API