Maynard v. Mier

85 Ind. 317
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1882·No. No. 9368·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Woods, C. J.

Appeal from a judgment on a promissory note, a copy of which was filed with the complaint. It contains a promise in the ordinary form, to pay a sum named, “ with interest at the rate of ten per cent, after maturity, and ten per cent, attorney’s fees.”

It is claimed that the court erred in overruling the defendants’ demurrer to the complaint. The entire argument on the point is in these words: The complaint is not sufficient in this, it is not definite and certain, and the copy of the note shows that the agreement (is) to pay ten per cent, attorney’s [318] fees, which we insist is void, and that, therefore, the note is-usurious as to that amount, and should be held void, and the: judgment reversed.”

. If the stipulation for attorney’s fees were conceded to be void, the validity of the note would not be otherwise affected.» and consequently the demurrer was properly overruled. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Maynard v. Mier, 85 Ind. 317 (Ind. 1882).

85 Ind. 317 (Maynard v. Mier) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Green v. State
97 Tenn. 50 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1896)
Oppenheimer v. Bank
33 L.R.A. 767 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1896)