Skip to main content
· 7/1/1856

Adams v. Hastings

Citations

  • 6 Cal. 126

Syllabus

<p>A written contract to pay more than ten per cent, per annum as interest, on an indebtedness incurred prior to the contract, is void for want of consideration as to the excess of interest up to the date of the contract.</p> <p>The indebtedness, being only for the principal and legal interest, is not sufficient to support a contract to pay a greater amount than was due. It is a voluntary undertaking, and can not be enforced.</p> <p>But a contract to pay in future a greater than legal interest on an existing indebtedness is binding, the forbearance of the creditor being a sufficient consideration.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that in a dispute between insurer and insured, in which the insurer admitted liability but disputed the amount of damages, “[i]t was only after entry of a judgment upon that verdict that the claim became liquidated”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Terry

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.