Klingensmith v. Reed
Klingensmith and Others v. Reed
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Gregory, J.
The -only question presented by the record arises on the action of the court below in sustaining the demurrer t© the third paragraph .of .the .answer.
J. S. Harvey, W. V. Burns, and I. Klingensmith, for appellants. R. B. $ J. 8. Duncan, for appellee.
The interrogatories filed by the plaintiff, the answers thereto by the appellants, and the paragraphs of the answer to the complaint which, were rejected by the court below on the motion of the appellee, are no part of the record, not having been made so by bill of exceptions.
The. note sued on bears, date the 27th day of September, 1866, aud is for $770, payable one year after date;
The paragraph of the answer to which the denrurrer was sustained avers, “that as to twenty-eight dollars, the plaintiff’ charged a greater rate of interest than six per cent., therefore unlawful aud usurious; aud that the same was included in the note.”
The law in force at the time the remedy was sought allowed parties to contract for the payment of any rate of interest not exceeding ten per cent, per annum,, and declared the taking of interest in excess of ten per cent, per annum usurious.
The paragraph in question is bad, for not showing any violation of this law.
The judgment is affirmed, with ten per cent, damages and costs.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.