Jones v. Phillippe
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Madison Chancery Court; B.'F. Mc-Mahan, Chancellor; 1. The plea of usury is not sufficient. It fails to allege a corrupt intent or agreement. 4 Ark. 44; lb. 410. A corrupt agreement and the intention to take or reserve more than the legal rate of interest are essential and must be averred. 26 Id. 356. The burden is on the party who pleads usury. 74 Ark. 241; 83 Id. 31; 105 Id. 653. The written contract is legal on its face and a parol contract to take usury must…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Madison Chancery Court; B.'F. Mc-Mahan, Chancellor; 1. The plea of usury is not sufficient. It fails to allege a corrupt intent or agreement. 4 Ark. 44; lb. 410. A corrupt agreement and the intention to take or reserve more than the legal rate of interest are essential and must be averred. 26 Id. 356. The burden is on the party who pleads usury. 74 Ark. 241; 83 Id. 31; 105 Id. 653. The written contract is legal on its face and a parol contract to take usury must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. 83 Ark. 31; 105 Id. 653. 2. The evidence does not show usury. 62 Ark. 99.…
1DissentMcCULLOCH, C. J.
The facts are undisputed and the case made out in the record is one where borrowers, by contract with their own agent, agreed to pay the latter a commission of $15 as compensation for procuring a loan of $300 from some third party or parties ; the agent applied to the lender and agreed to divide the commission, which the lender accepted in addition to charging the borrower the highest legal rate of interest. The contract between the borrowers and their agent for payment of the commission was an independent one to which the lender was not a party; and the subsequent contract between the lender…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Eslava v. CramptonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Dickey v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
- Collamer v. GoodrichSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858