Clark v. Hood System Industrial Bank of Reidsville
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
In tbe absence of allegations in tbe complaint tbat plaintiff paid to defendant as interest on loans of money made by defendant to plaintiff, sums in excess of six per centum per annum, tbe demurrer of defendant to tbe complaint was properly sustained. Allegations tbat defendant charged and received usury, on notes discounted by plaintiff with defendant, are not sufficient to constitute a cause of action on wbicb plaintiff is entitled to recover tbe statutory penalty for usury paid by plaintiff to defendant. Nor are allegations tbat defendant charged plaintiff interest in excess of six per…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ripple v. Mortgage & Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Waters v. GarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Miller v. . DunnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Waters v. . GarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Sloan v. Piedmont Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Kessing v. National Mortgage CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Polikoff v. Finance Service Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- North Carolina Mortgage Corp. v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Jonas v. Home Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Steed v. First Union National BankCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.