Norman v. Hill
Court of Appeals of Virginia
The facts of this case are sufficiently stated in the opinion of NASH, J. The argument of the cause in this court was very full and elaborate, upon the question, whether the debts *secured by the two first deeds, and the debt to Edward A. Hill, secured by the last deed, were founded upon usurious transactions, and upon the correctness of the decision of this court, in Roberts’ adm’r v. Kelly, (ante, p. 396,) in regard to the weight and effect of an answer in chancery…
Read the full summary
The facts of this case are sufficiently stated in the opinion of NASH, J. The argument of the cause in this court was very full and elaborate, upon the question, whether the debts *secured by the two first deeds, and the debt to Edward A. Hill, secured by the last deed, were founded upon usurious transactions, and upon the correctness of the decision of this court, in Roberts’ adm’r v. Kelly, (ante, p. 396,) in regard to the weight and effect of an answer in chancery responsive to the bill.
1Opinion of the CourtNash, J.
It appears from the testimony and pleading in this case, that John S. Norman, on the 24th day of September, 1846, executed to John W. George, a deed conveying a tract of land in the county of Culpeper containing five hundred and thirty-five acres in trust to secure the payment of $600, due from the said Newman to Thomas Hill, jr. by bond, dated the same day, and payable twelve months after date, with power to the trustee to sell the same for cash, upon the premises, upon default of payment, after advertising the time and place of sale for one month.
And on the 26th day of October, 1846, the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Smith v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Virginia · 1918
- Preston v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1906
- Wasserman v. MetzgerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1906
- Spencer v. LeeWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1881
- Everette v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Virginia · 1934
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.