Ammerman v. Ross
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Dallas District Gowrt. — Hon. A. W. Wilkinson, Judge. . Action in equity for a judgment on a promissory note, and for the foreclosure of a chattel mortgage given to secure the payment of the note. There was a defense of usury. It was determined that the claim of usury was not established by the evidence, and a judgment and decree were entered for the plaintiff, as prayed in the petition. The defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtRotheock, J.
It appears from the evidence that in the year 1886 Marshal Ammerman and Adolphus Ammerman were partners in business as merchants and loan brokers at Perry, in Dallas county. They were not loaning their own money, but the money of others. On the twenty-second day of February, 1886, the defendant made an application to said Marshal Ammerman for a loan. The amount of money which the defendant required was three hundred fifty dollars. Ammerman paid the defendant three hundred fifty dollars, and took his promissory note for three hundred *360sixty-seven dollars and fifty cents, payable to tbe order of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gokey v. KnappSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Erickson v. BellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
- Hough v. HamlinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
3Cited by2 opinions
- Searl v. EarllDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
- Barger v. TaylorOregon Supreme Court · 1895