Bosler v. Rheem
This text of 72 Pa. 54 (Bosler v. Rheem) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered
— We agree with the learned judge below, that ’ the agreement of even date with the note in question, the purpose of which was to waive any right to reclaim the excess of interest stipulated to be paid by the maker of the note to the payee, had not that effect. The Act 6f 1858, on this subject, was passéd to regulate the rate of interest among the people, and to change the odious system of forfeitures existing under the old law. Under the new act any lender may receive more than six per cent, interest without any penalty or forfeiture, subject only to have it recouped or reclaimed by the payor. If this be not done the party receiving the interest can hold it lawfully. We cannot, and perhaps never could, hold that this right to reclaim excessive interest may be waived in a note, or by a contemporaneous instrument. It would be better to repeal the provision altogether than this, for it would [57]*57be resorted to in every case of loan or contract. We cannot allow public policy to be set aside in this manner. The opinion of the learned judge below is a satisfactory presentation of the law on this point.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
72 Pa. 54, 1872 Pa. LEXIS 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bosler-v-rheem-pa-1872.