Case ID: misc_51/html/0673-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Cubiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Julius M. Ferguson, Respondent, v. Franklin Bien and Dora H. Nellis, Appellants.
    Usury — Elements and indicia — Pleading, evidence and questions of law and fact.
    Appeal by the defendants from a judgment of the City Court of the city of New York, rendered in favor of the plaintiff.
    Franklin Bien, for appellant Hellis.
    William Klein, for appellant Bien.
    Ferguson & Ferguson, for respondent.
   Pee Cubiam.

If the defendants were not entitled to have the question of usury decided by the jury, the judgment must be affirmed; for that is the only question the defendants asked the court to submit to the jury. There was no evidence that the plaintiff received the bonus, or knew of or was chargeable with knowledge of the taking of the bonus; and, therefore, the note in the plaintiff’s hands was not tainted with usury. See Lee v. Chadsey, 3 Abb. Ct. App. Dec. 43.

The judgment must be affirmed, with costs.

Present: Gildebsleeve, Dugbo and Dowling, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.