Moir v. Harrington
This text of 22 Ill. 40 (Moir v. Harrington) 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.
Opinion
The only question in this case arises from the demurrer to the second plea, which was sustained by the court. That plea commences thus: “ and for a further plea in this behalf, the said defendants say actio non, because they say,” etc., and then goes on to show that the note was given for an usurious loan of money—that the money loaned and usurious interest thereon were both included in the note. The plea Avas no doubt an excellent one where usury destroys the whole cause of action, but was a bad plea under our statute. It professes to answer the whole cause of action, but answers only a part.
The demurrer was properly sustained, and the judgment must be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
22 Ill. 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moir-v-harrington-ill-1859.