Henderson v. Hartman

Citations

• 65 Miss. 466

Syllabus

<p>Usury. Estoppel. Case in judgment.</p> <p>D. held a promissory note of H., largely made up of usurious interest, and secured by a deed of trust on the homestead of H. Shortly after the maturity of the note, H. procured J. to take up the same, he paying- the full face value thereof. H. assured J. that the note was amply secured, making no mention that it was in any part usurious, aud at the same time agreeing that the security for this note should also be made to cover tuition, to be thereafter furnished the daughters of H. by J. Afterwards J. assigned the note and security to one F., who took without notice of the usury. H. filed a bill to enjoin a sale under the trust deed, and to have the note purged of usury. F. answered, and making his answer a cross-bill, asked a foreclosure for the full amount shown to be due by the note. Held, that H. is estopped, on the facts above stated, from setting up usury as a defence to the demand for full payment of his note.</p>