Kenneth S. Thomson v. Herberich-Hall-Harter Company

Sixth Circuit

Kenneth S. Thomson v. Herberich-Hall-Harter Company

202 F.2d 954

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 19, 1953

Docket11665

StatusPublished

This text of 202 F.2d 954 (Kenneth S. Thomson v. Herberich-Hall-Harter Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kenneth S. Thomson v. Herberich-Hall-Harter Company, 202 F.2d 954 (6th Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case came on to be heard on the record and briefs and oral argument of counsel;

And it appearing that the findings of fact made by the District Court are supported by the record; that no compensable service was performed by the appellant to justify the so-called “commission” in connection with the mortgage loan involved in the trustee’s petition to sell real estate; and that the loan was usurious within the purview of Sections 8303 and 8306, Ohio General Code; but that the numerous other loans made by appellee to appellant had been paid and cancelled on or before July 31, 1947 and do not constitute a continuing transaction between the parties;

It is ordered that the judgment be and it hereby is affirmed for the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion of the District Court. In re Proteau, 110 F.S.upp. 904.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case came on to be heard on the record and briefs and oral argument of counsel;

And it appearing that the findings of fact made by the District Court are supported by the record; that no compensable service was performed by the appellant to justify the so-called “commission” in connection with the mortgage loan involved in the trustee’s petition to sell real estate; and that the loan was usurious within the purview of Sections 8303 and 8306, Ohio General Code; but that the numerous other loans made by appellee to appellant had been paid and cancelled on or before July 31, 1947 and do not constitute a continuing transaction between the parties;

It is ordered that the judgment be and it hereby is affirmed for the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion of the District Court. In re Proteau, 110 F.S.upp. 904.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 F.2d 954, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenneth-s-thomson-v-herberich-hall-harter-company-ca6-1953.