Loveland v. Ritter

Illinois Supreme Court

Loveland v. Ritter

50 Ill. 54

DecidedJanuary 15, 1869

StatusPublished

This text of 50 Ill. 54 (Loveland v. Ritter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Loveland v. Ritter, 50 Ill. 54 (Ill. 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Lawrence

delivered the opinion of the Court:

It is clear there was usury in the note from Eitter to Love-land, but we are of opinion the circuit court erred in decreeing to appellant only $338.04. The testimony of the parties as to the amount actually loaned is contradictory, but Eitter, only a few months before filing his bill, made a formal tender of $425, and when Loveland declined to receive that sum as the amount due, Eitter deposited it with the clerk of the court to be paid to Loveland upon his surrender of the note and cancellation of the mortgage, and took a certificate of the clerk to that effect, which was read upon the hearing. We consider this very deliberate statement by Eitter of the amount legally due, as stronger upon that point than any other proof in the case, and the court should have pronounced a decree for that sum.

Decree •reversed.

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

Mr. Justice Lawrence

delivered the opinion of the Court:

It is clear there was usury in the note from Eitter to Love-land, but we are of opinion the circuit court erred in decreeing to appellant only $338.04. The testimony of the parties as to the amount actually loaned is contradictory, but Eitter, only a few months before filing his bill, made a formal tender of $425, and when Loveland declined to receive that sum as the amount due, Eitter deposited it with the clerk of the court to be paid to Loveland upon his surrender of the note and cancellation of the mortgage, and took a certificate of the clerk to that effect, which was read upon the hearing. We consider this very deliberate statement by Eitter of the amount legally due, as stronger upon that point than any other proof in the case, and the court should have pronounced a decree for that sum.

Decree •reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 Ill. 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loveland-v-ritter-ill-1869.