Butterfield v. Kidder
This text of 25 Mass. 513 (Butterfield v. Kidder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court. The verbal promise to pay eight per cent when the note was made, [530]*530by which there was a promise to pay the money lent and lawful interest only, ought not to vitiate the note, for it was wholly without consideration and cannot be taken as part of the con tract, which was in writing and must be considered as evidence of the intention of the parties. Supposing the agreement to pay and receive more than six per cent, the plaintiff could recover nothing but what is promised by the note ; the additional promise was therefore wholly nugatory and cannot affect the note. If it be said, that by this contrivance the statute may be avoided, the answer is, that if that verbal promise should be carried into effect by paying unlawful interest, the taking would be an offence and the party would become liable for the penalty. But by this contract now in suit, there is not reserved or secured more than six per cent, and therefore the contract is not void.1
Judgment for plaintiff.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 Mass. 513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butterfield-v-kidder-mass-1829.