Black v. Tompkins
39 S.W. 553, 63 Ark. 502, 1897 Ark. LEXIS 135
Opinion
The question of law involved in this action was decided in Reeve v. Ladies' Building Association, 56 Ark. 335, and Taylor v. Van Buren Building Association, ib. 340. According to the opinion in those cases, there was and is no usury in the contracts sued on.
The decree of the chancery court is therefore reversed, and the cause is remanded, with instructions to the court to foreclose the mortgage sued on; ascertaining the amount due thereon according to the rule stated in Roberts v. American Building & Loan Association, 62 Ark. 572.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Black v. Tompkins, 39 S.W. 553, 63 Ark. 502, 1897 Ark. LEXIS 135 (Ark. 1897).
39 S.W. 553 (Black v. Tompkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
O'BRIEN v. Atlas Finance Co.
264 S.W.2d 839 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1954)
Hickingbotham v. Industrial Finance Corp.
91 S.W.2d 1023 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1936)
Simpson v. Smith Savings Society
12 S.W.2d 890 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1929)
Midland Savings & Loan Co. v. Henderson
150 P. 868 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1915)
Lindsay Et Ux. v. Chickasha Building Loan Ass'n.
1913 OK 144 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)