Keene v. Behan

Citations

• 40 Wash. 505
• 82 P. 884
• 1905 Wash. LEXIS 1017

Syllabus

<p>Bills and Notes — Actions—Defenses—Usury—Burden oe Proof. In an action by the indorsee of promissory notes, shown to be usurious and void in the hands of the original payee, the burden of proof is upon the holder to show that he acquired the notes before maturity, for value and in good faith, without notice of the usury.</p> <p>Same — Consideration—Title of Payee — When Defective. Under Laws 1899, p. 350, § 55, the title of a person who negotiates a promissory note is defective where the only consideration therefor was unlawful usury exacted on a former note between the same parties.</p> <p>Same — Evidence of Good Paite — Necessity. Under Laws 1899, p. 350, § 52, the burden of proof is upon the holder of a usurious note, to show affirmatively the facts constituting good faith upon his part, and that he had no notice of the defect, and it is not sufficient for him to prove that he acquired the notes before maturity for value.</p> <p>Same — Sufficiency. The claim that an indorsee acquired usurious notes before maturity, without notice of the usury, is not sustained where his testimony is uncorroborated, and it appears that he acquired the same at a heavy discount under suspicious circumstances, after one of the series was overdue, which he claimed not to have purchased, and after all had been declared due, that he demanded payment of all of them before his first one matured, that the former holder demanded payment after the date on which the indorsee claims to have bought them, and where he failed to state the circumstances under which he bought.</p>