Holmes v. French
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions, from the superior court. Assumpsit, on a promissory note dated May 30, 1857, by the indorsee, to whom it was indorsed after maturity, against the maker.
Read the full summary
On exceptions, from the superior court. Assumpsit, on a promissory note dated May 30, 1857, by the indorsee, to whom it was indorsed after maturity, against the maker. The justice of the superior court tried the action without a jury, and found as matters of fact, that, a certain sum as interest, exceeding six per cent, was included in the principal of the note ; that additional sums had been paid by the defendant to the payee, at different times, and by tlieir mutual consent, applied to the subsequently accruing interest, exceeding the rate of six per cent, and that there was no proof of…
1Opinion of the CourtYirghn, J.
The Stat. of 1870, c. 121, § 1, provided that, in the absence of any agreement in writing, “the legal rate of interest shall be six per cent per annum ;” and it took effect on March 11, 1870. Section 2 repealed “ all acts and parts of acts inconsistent therewith; ” and § 1, c. 15, R. S. of 1857, being the only section or part of a section “ inconsistent therewith,” was alone thereby repealed, leaving §§ 2 and 3 (pertaining to remedies in cases of excessive interest) as amended by Stats, of 1862, c. 136, and of 1863, c. 209, in force and unmodified.
The Stat. of 1870, c. 169, provided “that c.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Curtis and Others v. . LeavittNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
3Cited by2 opinions
- Coe v. Frederick E. Muller & Gulf Pine Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1917
- Beneficial Finance Co. v. State, Bureau of Banks & BankingSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978