Merritt & Myers v. Benton
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit tried at- tho Montgomery circuit, in May, 1831, before the Hon. Esek Cowen, one of the circuit judges. The defendant was the endorser of a promissory note for $276, dated 15th November, 1828, payable 5 months after date, given for the balance of a previous note of $332, held by the plaintiffs against one G. Petrie, the maker of the note .in question.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit tried at- tho Montgomery circuit, in May, 1831, before the Hon. Esek Cowen, one of the circuit judges. The defendant was the endorser of a promissory note for $276, dated 15th November, 1828, payable 5 months after date, given for the balance of a previous note of $332, held by the plaintiffs against one G. Petrie, the maker of the note .in question. The note of $332, was given under the following circumstances: on the 12th June, 1827, Petrie purchasell of the plaintiffs at New-York, where they carried on the business of merchants, a bill-of goods amounting to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
There was no excess of interest included in the note of $332. The interest of $325,18, for 60 days and 3 days of grace, which the plaintiffs had a right *118to charge, amounted to $3,92, making .the principal and interest $329,10, to which add one pét' cent., the rate of exchange agreed on, and the sum of .$332,39, is given, from which deduct the amount paid by Petrie, and the balance is' $332,11, a sum exceeding the amount of the note, which therefore was not usurious as including a sum of interest greater than what is allowed by law. Nor was the including the rate of…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Seymour v. MarvinNew York Supreme Court · 1851
- Towslee v. DurkeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Beadle v. MunsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1861
- Ely v. M'ClungSupreme Court of Alabama · 1836
- Curtis, Graham & Blatchford v. LeavittNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.