Case ID: ill-app_195/html/0637-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Barnes", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hugo Munzer et al., Appellees, v. Kate K. Hillabrant, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 20,960.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Usury, § 56
      
      —when evidence insufficient to establish usury, in a bill to foreclose a trust deed, a finding by the master that the 'loan secured by the trust deed sought to be foreclosed was not usurious as including a commission from the lender, held not contrary to the evidence where there was positive evidence to sustain the finding, against which there were circumstantial facts not inconsistent therewith.
    Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. John M. O’Connor, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed December 21, 1915.
    Statement of the Case.
    Bill by Hugo Munzer and others, complainants, against Kate K. Hillabrant, defendant, in the Superior Court of Cook county, to foreclose a trust deed. From a decree of foreclosure, defendant appeals.
    Complainant applied for the loan to a real estate agent in Chicago and authorized a commission to be paid therefor. The latter applied to a second party and he in-turn to a third who obtained the money from a fourth party and received part of the commission.
    The evidence tended to show that the loan actually came from the fourth party, who received part of the commission, and that the intermediate parties acted as agents for the borrower and not for the lender.
    Robert B. Clark and P. H. Bishop, for appellant.
    Samuel J. Richman, for appellees.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.