Robinson, Thieme & Morris v. Whittier

Citations

• 112 Wash. 6
• 191 P. 763
• 1920 Wash. LEXIS 677

Syllabus

<p>Ustjey (11)—What Constitutes—Agreement for Services to be Rendered by Render. A charge of $1,000 for a loan of $2,250, which was included in notes of the borrower and was to hear interest, is an usurious transaction, although the parties signed an instrument which provided for services to be rendered by the lender, such contract being indefinite as to time and kind of services rendered, and it appeared that the services actually rendered were of no practical value and that the agreement amounted merely to a shift or device to cover illegal interest on money loaned.</p> <p>Chattel Mortgages (18, 24)—Validity—Affidavit and Recording—Effect of Reacknowledgment. A chattel mortgage which was not filed within ten days from the time of execution, though duly acknowledged and accompanied by the affidavit of the mortgagor, is-not validated by a reacknowledgment and a redating and filing, without a resigning or the making of an affidavit of good faith by the mortgagor, since the statute, Rem. Code, §§ 3660, 3661, requires a strict compliance with all essential requirements, without which the mortgage can have no validity as against creditors.</p> <p>Same (46)—-Affidavit and Recording—Validity—Effect of Possession by Mortgagee. In such a case, it cannot he claimed that the taking possession of the property by the mortgagee before the rights of creditors accrued would validate the mortgage, the evidence merely showing that certain chattels were removed by an agent of the mortgagee at the direction of the mortgagor and were wrongfully taken to a place other than that intended, but not under the care of the mortgagee, and that he knew nothing of the removal of the goods and never had possession.</p>