Hogg v. Ruffner
Supreme Court of the United States
Cross-appeal, from the decree of the District Court of the United. States for the district of Indiana. Nathaniel B. Hogg brought his bill in the Circuit Court against Benjamin Ruffner and several other defendants, who were collaterally interested.
Read the full summary
Cross-appeal, from the decree of the District Court of the United. States for the district of Indiana. Nathaniel B. Hogg brought his bill in the Circuit Court against Benjamin Ruffner and several other defendants, who were collaterally interested. The bill avers that Ruffner made his nineteen promissory notes, for two thousand dolíalas each, amounting in all' to thirty-eight thousand dollars, payable to the order of John ~W. Brice and James L. Birkey, with in-, terest from their date, and that these notes were- delivered to Brice and Birkey; that in order to secure the payment of the notes,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Grier
If the exception taken to the decree of the court- below by. the complainant be sustained, it will be unnecessary to notice those taken by the respondents. ;
Was the contract of Brice and Birkey with Ruffner, which shows the consideration of the mortgage and notes assigned to the complainants, usurious?
The statute of Indiana declares, that “the rate of interest upon the loan or for the forbearance of any money, &c., shall be at the rate of six” per cent.; but “if a greater rate of interest shall be contracted for, received, or reserved, the contract shall not, therefore, be void;” “the…
2Cited by67 opinions
- Catalano, Inc. v. Target Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Rathbun v. WT Grant CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- Carper v. Kanawha Banking & Trust Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1974
- Van Asperen v. Darling Olds, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
- State v. J. C. Penney Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.