Legal Opinion

Mooney v. Petnick

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided April 13, 1929PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This is a bill to foreclose. The only defense interposed is that of usury. The defendant Louis Petnick answers and says that he executed to the complainant a certain bond purporting on its face to secure the sum of $17,000, conditioned for the payment of that sum within five years from the date thereof, with interest at the rate of six per cent. per annum payable semi-annually, but denies that he was indebted to complainant in any such sum, and further says that the complainant only advanced the sum of $15,850, which was actually received by him as the consideration for said bond,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Borough of Vineland v. MarettiNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1922
  2. Delaware Bay & Cape May Railroad v. MarkleySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1888
  3. Taylor v. MorrisSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1872
  4. Arnaud v. GriggNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1878
  5. Boehme v. RallNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1893

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hinners v. BirkevaagNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
  2. Brown v. ComerAtlantic County Circuit Court, N.J. · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API