Vickery v. Dickson
New York Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment on the report of a referee. The action was to foreclose a mortgage, and was defended on the ground that the mortgage was usurious, and also on the ground that the mortgagor, (the defendant,) at the time of its execution, was non compos mentis.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Allen, J.
Upon the trial the defendant, who is the mortgagor, offered to prove the facts set forth in his answer, and insisted that if proved, they established the defense of usury. The plaintiff objected to the evidence, on the ground that the facts stated in the answer did not show the defendant a borrower, or surety, for John W. Dickson, (who was the borrower.) The referee decided that the answer was not sufficient to make out a case of usury, and sustained the objection. The answer set forth a usury loan to John W. Dickson, secured by his bond and mortgage for twelve hundred…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- De Wolf v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
- Post v. DartNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
- Bridge v.HubbardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
- Steele v. WhippleNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Walker v. President of the Bank of WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1844
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Cope v. AldenNew York Supreme Court · 1867
- McCullough v. MitchellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
- King v. Perry Insurance & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1876
- Taylor v. MorrisSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1872
- Kilner v. O'BrienNew York Supreme Court · 1878
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.