Taylor v. First Mtg. Loan Co.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Taylor v. First Mtg. Loan Co.

1937 OK 283, 67 P.2d 953, 180 Okla. 55, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 554

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 27, 1937

DocketNo. 26298.

StatusPublished

This text of 1937 OK 283 (Taylor v. First Mtg. Loan Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Taylor v. First Mtg. Loan Co., 1937 OK 283, 67 P.2d 953, 180 Okla. 55, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 554 (Okla. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is an appeal by Ruby L. Taylor et al. from a judgment rendered in her favor in so far as a declaration of usurious interest is concerned. Her reason for appeal is based upon the fact that a verdict and judgment was entered against her for $174.16, whereas she claims that she had become entitled to a greater credit. By the' opinion of this court in No. 26443, Pickering v. Taylor, 180 Okla. 96, 67 P. (2d) 949, it is found that the verdict and judgment was entered against her for $174.16, thereby allowing a set-off under the defense of usury of $6,102.88.

This court in said above opinion reversed *56 and remanded the cause after a consideration upon the merits, holding as follows:

“As hereinabove shown, the answer and cross-petition of the defendants Taylor failed to state, and the evidence failed to prove, facts constituting a defense of usury or of conspiracy to commit usury to plaintiff’s action. There being no issue of fact to be tried, the judgment is reversed, with instructions to the trial court to render judgment in favor of plaintiff establishing his lien for the amount sued 'for, and for foreclosure thereof.”

That opinion having disposed of the appeal in this case, the appeal is dismissed.

OSBORN, O. X, BAYLESS, V. O. X. and BUSBY, PI-IELPS. and CORN, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause is an appeal by Ruby L. Taylor et al. from a judgment rendered in her favor in so far as a declaration of usurious interest is concerned. Her reason for appeal is based upon the fact that a verdict and judgment was entered against her for $174.16, whereas she claims that she had become entitled to a greater credit. By the' opinion of this court in No. 26443, Pickering v. Taylor, 180 Okla. 96, 67 P. (2d) 949, it is found that the verdict and judgment was entered against her for $174.16, thereby allowing a set-off under the defense of usury of $6,102.88.

This court in said above opinion reversed *56 and remanded the cause after a consideration upon the merits, holding as follows:

“As hereinabove shown, the answer and cross-petition of the defendants Taylor failed to state, and the evidence failed to prove, facts constituting a defense of usury or of conspiracy to commit usury to plaintiff’s action. There being no issue of fact to be tried, the judgment is reversed, with instructions to the trial court to render judgment in favor of plaintiff establishing his lien for the amount sued 'for, and for foreclosure thereof.”

That opinion having disposed of the appeal in this case, the appeal is dismissed.

OSBORN, O. X, BAYLESS, V. O. X. and BUSBY, PI-IELPS. and CORN, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1937 OK 283, 67 P.2d 953, 180 Okla. 55, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-first-mtg-loan-co-okla-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack