Skip to main content
· 6/13/1884

Hoyt v. Pawtucket Institution for Savings

Citations

  • 110 Ill. 390

Syllabus

<p>1. Usury—interest in advance. The taking of the legal rate of interest in advance is not regarded as usurious.</p> <p>2. Same—of commissions to loan agents. Brokers negotiating loans of other people’s money may charge the borrower commissions, without thereby making a loan at the full rate of legal interest usurious, where there is no arrangement with the lender that commissions shall be charged by the agent.</p> <p>3. Sale under trust deed—notice thereof—sufficiency, as showing amoumt dme. A notice of sale under a deed of trust contained this clause: “Default has been made in the payment of part of the interest note due November 22, 1876, and the whole of the interest note due May 22, 1877; and whereas, the legal holder of said note and unpaid interest coupons (the Pawtucket Institution for Savings) has thereupon exercised its option of declaring the whole principal sum, and the interest thereon, due and payable; and whereas, default has been made in the payment of the principal and interest so become due and payable, ” etc.: Held, that the notice showed, with reasonable certainty, that the amount claimed to be due was the principal sum, the interest note due May 22, 1877, and part of the interest note due November 22, 1876, and stated substantially the amount due. As to the part due on the latter note the notice was indefinite, but, considering the amounts involved, (the principal being $5000, and the interest notes $250,) and the smallness of the sum due on such interest note, the notice was held substantially good.</p> <p>4. Same—inadequacy of price—whether so regarded. In August, 1877, real estate was sold under a deed of trust for $5250, which the witnesses placed in value at $15,000 at that time, which it appeared was much more than the property could then have been sold for, there being no market for' the property at the latter price, and no demand for such property; and it appeared that in August, 1881, when the prices had advanced, it was sold for only

Judges: Dickey, Sheldon

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.