Sizer v. Miller

New York Supreme Court

Sizer v. Miller

1 Hill & Den. 227

DecidedMay 15, 1841

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Hill & Den. 227 (Sizer v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sizer v. Miller, 1 Hill & Den. 227 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1841).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

The case states the special grounds on which the two referees proceeded who agreed in making the report. They have not found any intention in the trustees of Rathbun to take usury, or that there was any shift or device to evade the statute. Indeed, they have not drawn any conclusion of fact from the evidence, but say they are of opinion, “ as mat- ' ter of law, that the note was void for usury.” In this we think they erred. The evidence does not necessarily and as a matter of law make out the fact of usury, and there must consequently be a rehearing.

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

Per Curiam.

The case states the special grounds on which the two referees proceeded who agreed in making the report. They have not found any intention in the trustees of Rathbun to take usury, or that there was any shift or device to evade the statute. Indeed, they have not drawn any conclusion of fact from the evidence, but say they are of opinion, “ as mat- ' ter of law, that the note was void for usury.” In this we think they erred. The evidence does not necessarily and as a matter of law make out the fact of usury, and there must consequently be a rehearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Hill & Den. 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sizer-v-miller-nysupct-1841.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack