Beggs v. Butler

1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 52, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 337
CourtSaratoga Chancery Court
DecidedJuly 20, 1841
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 52 (Beggs v. Butler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Saratoga Chancery Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beggs v. Butler, 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 52, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 337 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1841).

Opinion

The chancellor decided in this case that in a suit in this court, brought to obtain a perpetual injunction restraining the prosecution of an action at law against the complainants as sureties and another person as the principal maker of a joint and several promissory note, the principal is a necessary party.. That under the Act of 1837, to prevent usury, where a suit is brought upon a note alleged to be usurious, in the name of a nominal plaintiff, for the benefit of the real holder and owner of the note, the latter may be compelled to testify to the fact of usury, in the same manner as if he was the nominal plaintiff in the suit. That the circumstance of there being no other evidence of the usury, therefore, than the testimony of the real holder and owner of the note, will not furnish a sufficient reason for coming into this court for relief, on the ground that there is no adequate remedy at law. Decretal order of the vice-chancellor of the Eighth Circuit reversed, without costs to either party upon the appeal, and demurrers allowed, and bill dismissed, with costs, but without prejudice, etc.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 52, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beggs-v-butler-nychanctsara-1841.