Styles v. Riley

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Styles v. Riley

4 Ky. Op. 396, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 387

DecidedOctober 12, 1870

StatusPublished

This text of 4 Ky. Op. 396 (Styles v. Riley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Styles v. Riley, 4 Ky. Op. 396, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 387 (Ky. Ct. App. 1870).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Robertson :

If, as urged by Riley’s counsel, Styles was not entitled to interest on the unpaid notes for- his land since the declaration of Bray’s bankruptcy, still, as he was charged with interest on his larger note as purchaser from the assignee without a credit for the lien notes, he was charged virtually with interest on his own money and the allowance complained of was, in effect, but a centralization of the unjust charge of interest against him.

The note for $274 seems to have been given for interest on the lien notes for the year 1865. That incidental interest was not a new debt, but the legal inurement of the lien debt, and' neither the endorsed credit nor the taking of personal security without other evidence of actual acceptance as partial payment can be considered, as tantamount to a. release of the lien pro tanto.' It seems to us, therefore, that the lien still subsists for so much of the note for $274 as was for interest. The decree disallowing the whole of the note is therefore adjudged erroneous.

But the disallowance of the $60 note was right.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a credit of the note for $274 to the extent' hereinbefore indicated.

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

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Robertson :

If, as urged by Riley’s counsel, Styles was not entitled to interest on the unpaid notes for- his land since the declaration of Bray’s bankruptcy, still, as he was charged with interest on his larger note as purchaser from the assignee without a credit for the lien notes, he was charged virtually with interest on his own money and the allowance complained of was, in effect, but a centralization of the unjust charge of interest against him.

The note for $274 seems to have been given for interest on the lien notes for the year 1865. That incidental interest was not a new debt, but the legal inurement of the lien debt, and' neither the endorsed credit nor the taking of personal security without other evidence of actual acceptance as partial payment can be considered, as tantamount to a. release of the lien pro tanto.' It seems to us, therefore, that the lien still subsists for so much of the note for $274 as was for interest. The decree disallowing the whole of the note is therefore adjudged erroneous.

But the disallowance of the $60 note was right.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a credit of the note for $274 to the extent' hereinbefore indicated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Ky. Op. 396, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/styles-v-riley-kyctapp-1870.