Stanley v. Westrop
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Harris. Tried before the Hon. Peter W. Gray. Suit by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error, on the note of the latter, payable to the former, dated at Houston, June 21st, 1853, for $242 50, due Oct. 1st, 1853. Answer, that the consideration for which said note was given, was unlawful, and usurious interest, upon a note for more than twelve per cent., which note has been paid off and discharged.
Read the full summary
Error from Harris. Tried before the Hon. Peter W. Gray. Suit by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error, on the note of the latter, payable to the former, dated at Houston, June 21st, 1853, for $242 50, due Oct. 1st, 1853. Answer, that the consideration for which said note was given, was unlawful, and usurious interest, upon a note for more than twelve per cent., which note has been paid off and discharged. It appeared from the statement of facts, that on the 1st of October, 1851, plaintiff loaned defendant Stanley $500, for which he took his note, payable January 1st, 1852,…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
It appears indisputably by the evidence, that the original contract was for the payment of a greater rate of interest than is allowed by law ; and, consequently, it was illegal and void for the whole amount of interest stipulated for. (Hart. Dig. Art. 1609.) The agreement to pay usurious interest was not expressed in the face of the note, but, it seems, was verbal. In taking up the old and giving the new note, the aggregate amount of principal and interest, computed at the *203usurious rate agreed upon, was ascertained, the payments deducted from the sum, and the new note given for the balance…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Davenport v. MasonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
3Cited by11 opinions
- Boothe v. FiestTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- Gladwin State Bank v. DowMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Stephens County v. H. C. Burt & Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Hanrick v. JacksonTexas Supreme Court · 1880
- Fretz v. MurrayMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.