U. T. Hungerford Brass & Copper Co. v. Brigham
New York Supreme Court
Action on a promissory note.
1Opinion of the CourtClarke, J.
The action is on a promissory note. The defense is usury. The note, dated December 21, 1903, for «$3,333.33, payable .December 20, 1904, was made by defendant and another, payable to U„ T. Hungerford, who indorsed and delivered it- to plaintiff company. Plaintiff took with notice, as Mr, Hungerford was an officer of the company. The defendant gave 100 shares of the Goetz Manufacturing Co. stock, par value $100 per share, as collateral security. The note was given upon the renewal of a loan made November 7, 1903. The defendant relies upon an agreement under seal of even date with the renewal…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Sturm v. BokerSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Welland Canal Co. v. HathawayNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Brewster v. . StrikerNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
- Rosenstein v. . FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Utica Insurance v. BloodgoodNew York Supreme Court · 1830
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Gilbert v. OttersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Holt v. RickettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- Wolf v. Aero Factors CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1954
- Angelo v. BrennerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Heubusch v. BooneSupreme Court of Virginia · 1972
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.