Van Hamm v. Fox

Appellate Court of Illinois

Van Hamm v. Fox

207 Ill. App. 469, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 700

Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided October 10, 1917·No. Gen. No. 22,407·Published

Opinion

Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Usuby, § 4* — not question of intention. Usury is not a question of intention of the parties. 3. Costs, § 67* — when allowed because of appeal for delay. A defense being obviously interposed merely for delay and to wear out the opposite party in whose favor judgment was rendered, held that damages, to the amount of ten per cent., should be assessed under Rev. St. ch. 33, sec. 23 (J. & A. If 2737), relating to the assessment of damages when an appeal is for delay, in affirming the judgment.

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

Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Usuby, § 4* — not question of intention. Usury is not a question of intention of the parties. 3. Costs, § 67* — when allowed because of appeal for delay. A defense being obviously interposed merely for delay and to wear out the opposite party in whose favor judgment was rendered, held that damages, to the amount of ten per cent., should be assessed under Rev. St. ch. 33, sec. 23 (J. & A. If 2737), relating to the assessment of damages when an appeal is for delay, in affirming the judgment.

Van Hamm v. Fox, 207 Ill. App. 469, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 700 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

207 Ill. App. 469 (Van Hamm v. Fox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.