Britz v. Kinsvater

UDALL, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, Mathilda Kinsvater, and against defendants-appellants, Maurice A. and Clare A. Britz. The action was one to recover payments of interest which were allegedly usurious, i. e., in violation of A.R..S. § 44 — 1202. The case was tried to the court, sitting without a jury. The parties will hereinaftef be designated as they appeared in the trial court, i. e., plaintiff and defendant.

There are two dáímed errors:

1. The conclusions of law are not supported by the findings of fact;

2. The judgment is not supported by the evidence.

Ina…