Swartz v. Historical Publishing Co.

Citations

• 55 Pa. Super. 407
• 1913 Pa. Super. LEXIS 383

Syllabus

<p>Promissory notes — Affidavit of defense — Usury.</p> <p>1. Where it is not clear whether an averment of an affidavit of defense is of a fact or of an inference of law from particular facts not set forth, it is bad for uncertainty.</p> <p>2. In an action by the indorsee of a promissory note against the indorser, who was the payee named in the note, where the statement of claim avers that the note was duly indorsed by the payee and passed for a good and valuable consideration to the plaintiff before maturity, an affidavit of defense is insufficient which avers that the note in suit was a renewal note, made up to a very large extent of a large amount of usury, without any denial that the note passed to the plaintiff before maturity for a valuable consideration, and without any averment that the plaintiff had any such connection with or notice of the usury alleged to have been charged on the discount of the original note.</p>