Haigh v. Crocker
This text of 44 N.Y. St. Rep. 834 (Haigh v. Crocker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
One of the questions, and indeed the only one was, whether the appellant was implicated in the taking of usury upon certain notes and a mortgage to secure them made by the respondents upon personal property. The business was done by agents of the appellant who claim that she did not authorize, or know of or benefit by the usury that no doubt was taken. The learned judge was not absolutely bound to believe the affidavits read for defendant. Indeed they might literally be true- and yet there be such a relation between the appellants and agents-in this matter, as would evince a complicity between them.
Order affirmed, with ten dollar’s costs to abide the event
Sedgwick, Oh. J., Dugro and Gildersleeve. JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
44 N.Y. St. Rep. 834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haigh-v-crocker-nysuperctnyc-1892.