Scheidig v. Bemis
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from judgment on report of referee. Action by Fred Scheidig against Edward H. Bemis and Marion E. Bemis, brought upon a promissory note made by the defendants, payable to the order of the plaintiff, for the “sum of eighty-five dollars and fifty-eight cents, with three years’ interest at six per cent., at the First National Bank of Glens Falls, N. Y., one year from the date of said note.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment on report of referee. Action by Fred Scheidig against Edward H. Bemis and Marion E. Bemis, brought upon a promissory note made by the defendants, payable to the order of the plaintiff, for the “sum of eighty-five dollars and fifty-eight cents, with three years’ interest at six per cent., at the First National Bank of Glens Falls, N. Y., one year from the date of said note.” The answer of the defendants does not deny any allegation of the complaint, but sets up a plea of usury, alleging that plaintiff agreed to extend the time of payment of the said sum of $85.58 for one…
1Opinion of the CourtLearned, P. J.
The defendants must make out their title to relief on the ground of usury by allegation and proof. Bank v. Boynton, 105 N. Y. 656, 11 N. E. Rep. 837. They cannot assert that the complaint in this case shows-no cause of action; because the note is not void for usury unless there was a loan or forbearance of money, goods, or things in action. 1 Rev. St. marg. p. 772, § 5. If real.estate is soíd, and the purchase-money mortgage is antedated, this is not usurious. Frank v. Davis, 6 N. Y. Supp. 144. The cases-cited by defendants, holding that obligations which on their face appeared to-be made by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ewing v. HowardSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Marvin v. FesterNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Frank v. DavisNew York Supreme Court · 1889