Campbell v. Connable

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Campbell v. Connable

98 N.Y.S. 231

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 26, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 98 N.Y.S. 231 (Campbell v. Connable) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Campbell v. Connable, 98 N.Y.S. 231 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

O’GORMAN, J.

This action is brought to recover usurious interest paid by plaintiff to the defendant, and at the close of the plaintiff’s case the complaint was dismissed, on the ground, as stated by the learned justice, that it appeared from certain exhibits in the case that the transactions were not loans, but purchases and assignments of salary to become due. But these exhibits did not conclude the plaintiff, and the circumstance that a contract is in writing does not exclude parol evidence that the written instrument is but a cloak for a usurious transaction. Knickerbocker Life v. Nelson, 78 N. Y. 149. Plaintiff testified to usurious exactions, which, undisputed, would support a judgment in his favor. The dismissal was improper.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concur.

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

O’GORMAN, J.

This action is brought to recover usurious interest paid by plaintiff to the defendant, and at the close of the plaintiff’s case the complaint was dismissed, on the ground, as stated by the learned justice, that it appeared from certain exhibits in the case that the transactions were not loans, but purchases and assignments of salary to become due. But these exhibits did not conclude the plaintiff, and the circumstance that a contract is in writing does not exclude parol evidence that the written instrument is but a cloak for a usurious transaction. Knickerbocker Life v. Nelson, 78 N. Y. 149. Plaintiff testified to usurious exactions, which, undisputed, would support a judgment in his favor. The dismissal was improper.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

98 N.Y.S. 231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-connable-nyappterm-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack