Kirlicks v. Interstate Building & Loan Ass'n

113 F. 290, 51 C.C.A. 318, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 3961
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided January 21, 1902·No. No. 1,061·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Under the conceded facts of this case, the appellant Thomas contracted with the Interstate Building & Loan Association and appellant Kirlicks to pay in installments the taxes on the mortgaged property due to the city of Houston, and having failed therein, whereby the city obtained judgment and caused the sale of the property, he must, in equity, be held to have purchased from the city of Houston subject to the mortgage of, or as trustee for, the Interstate Building & Loan Association. See Mendenhall v. Hall, 134 U. S. 559, 10 Sup. Ct. 616, 33 L. Ed. 1012.

The contract of loan was not usurious. See Association v. Logan, 14 C. C. A. 133, 66 Fed. 827; Association v. Abbott, 85 Tex. 220, 224, 20 S. W. 118; Association v. Goforth (Tex. Sup.) 59 S. W. 871.

The decree of the circuit court is affirmed on both appeals.

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

Kirlicks v. Interstate Building & Loan Ass'n, 113 F. 290, 51 C.C.A. 318, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 3961 (5th Cir. 1902).

113 F. 290 (Kirlicks v. Interstate Building & Loan Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mendenhall v. Hall
134 U.S. 559 (Supreme Court, 1890)
International Building & Loan Ass'n v. Abbott
20 S.W. 118 (Texas Supreme Court, 1892)
Interstate Building & Loan Ass'n v. Goforth
59 S.W. 871 (Texas Supreme Court, 1900)
Building & Loan Ass'n of Dakota v. Logan
66 F. 827 (Fifth Circuit, 1895)