Poppleton v. Nelson
Oregon Supreme Court
Yamhill County. Defendants appeal. Suit to foreclose a mortgage. The answer sets up the following facts, and claims that they render the pote and mortgage sued on usurious: That in February, 1874, defendant ISTelson requested Edgar Poppleton to loan him $1,300, which he agreed to do for a ten per cent bonus and twelve per cent interest, to which Nelson agreed; that on the 4th day of May, 1874, Nelson applied to said Edgar Poppleton for said money upon said conditions; said…
Read the full summary
Yamhill County. Defendants appeal. Suit to foreclose a mortgage. The answer sets up the following facts, and claims that they render the pote and mortgage sued on usurious: That in February, 1874, defendant ISTelson requested Edgar Poppleton to loan him $1,300, which he agreed to do for a ten per cent bonus and twelve per cent interest, to which Nelson agreed; that on the 4th day of May, 1874, Nelson applied to said Edgar Poppleton for said money upon said conditions; said Poppleton refused to make said loan unless he pay $22 accrued interest and $11 recording and attorneys’ fees in addition…
1Opinion of the CourtLoud, J.
This is a suit in equity to forclose a mortgage. The defense is usury. This is the main question involved, and is one of fact, which needs to be proved by clear and satisfactory evidence. As the defense of usury involves a forfeiture, it is considered as an unconscionable defense, and a strict one. To establish such a defense the court requires clear and cogent proof, and will ngt accept vague inferences, or mere probabilities, or resort to conjectures, to aid the defense. The burden of *351proof is on the defense, and he must sustain his allegations by a clear preponderance of evidence “ He is…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Coast Finance Corp. v. Powers Furniture Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Holt v. Aetna Bldg. Loan AssociationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Nunn v. BirdOregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Shirley v. BirchOregon Supreme Court · 1888
- Portland Trust Co. v. HavelyOregon Supreme Court · 1899
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.