Case ID: ky_31/html/0429-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Chief Justice Robertson", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ward against Everett.
    Chancery.
    
      October 21.
    The chancellor cannot allow interest on ajudg-mentwhich does not bear interest at law — and must enjoin it, when the payments are equal to the damages and costs.
    A charge for a commission, or discount, on a bill of exchange received in payment,. must be proved —courts will not take notice of a mercantile usage, to. allow it.
    [Mr. Davis for Plaintiff: Mr. James Trimble for Defendant.]
    From the Circuit Court for Montgomery County.
   Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

It seems to this court, that the circuit court erred in not perpetuating the injunction to the entire judgment.

As the judgment was for damages, interest did not accrue on it. And the payments since made, extinguished the principal sum adjudged for damages and costs.

There having been such extinguishment at Zaw, the chancellor should not withhold a decree enjoining any further collection by execution, merely because he may think that, in foro conscientúe-, the complainant ought to have paid interest. The judgment was satisfied, and cannot for any part be enforced.

Nor should the chancellor have allowed one half per cent, on the bills of exchange. There is no proof to justify the allowance, and this court cannot know that, without any proof, the lex mercatoria gives one half per cent.

Decree reversed, and cause remanded, with instructions to perpetuate the injunction to the whole judgment.