Case Name: Robert Oliver v. Susan Decatur
Court: United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1834-03
Citations: 4 Cranch 461
Docket Number: 
Parties: Robert Oliver v. Susan Decatur.
Judges: (ThRUston, J., contrá,)
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (District of Columbia - reported by Mackey)
Volume: 4
Pages: 461–462

Head Matter:
Robert Oliver v. Susan Decatur.
If the interest is, by the agreement, payable annually, it is not usury to add it to the principal, at the end of the year, and take a new note for the whole, bearing interest.
Assumpsit, against the maker of a promissory note.
Mr. Marbury and Mr. JR. S. Coxe, for the defendant,
prayed the Court to instruct the jury, in effect, that, if they should be satisfied, by the evidence, that the plaintiff loaned to the defend-. ant, on the 3d of November, 1820, the sum of $3,000, and on the 22d of December, 1820, the further sum of $12,000, and on the 26th of June, 1822, the further sum of $8,000, and that, at the times of the loans, respectively, it was agreed between the said parties, that the interest thereon should be paid annually, according to the respective dates of the said loans; and that, afterwards, the plaintiff calculated the interest of the said loan of $3,000, from the 3d of November, 1820, to the 31st of December, 1821; and on the said loan of $12,000, from the 22d of December, 1820, to the 31st of December, 1821; and afterwards calculated interest upon the said interest from the 31st of December, 1821, to the 31st of December, 1822; and that the promissory note of the defendant, upon which this suit is brought, was given for, and included, the interest upon the interest, so calculated, and also the interest upon the said loan of $8,000, so calculated as aforesaid, then the said note is usurious, and the plaintiff cannot recover thereupon in this action.
Mr. Key
cited Peter v. Brackenridge, in this Court, May, 1830; Bank of Washington v. Eliot; Anstruther, 495, and 1 Johns. Ch. Rep. 14.
Mr. Marbury cited Comyn on Usury, 82, § 7-14; Noy, 71; 3 B. & P. 154; 9 Ves. 223; 6 Johns. Ch. Rep. 313.

Opinion:
But the Court
(ThRUston, J., contrá,)
refused to give the instruction.
(See Comyn on Usury, 87, 147; 1 Bulstrode, 17; 2 Salk. 449; 1 Ch. Ca. 258; Brown v. Barkham, 1 P. W. 652; Thornhill v. Evans, 1 Atk. 330; Morgan v. Mather, 2 Ves. Jr. 15; Waring v. Cunliffe, 1 Id. 99.)
Verdict for plaintiff, $7,558.