Case Name: Lucius L. Spring, executor, &c., of Gardiner Spring, deceased, v. Francis H. Reed and others
Court: New Jersey Court of Chancery
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1877-05
Citations: 28 N.J. Eq. 345
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lucius L. Spring, executor, &c., of Gardiner Spring, deceased, v. Francis H. Reed and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Equity Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 345–345

Head Matter:
Lucius L. Spring, executor, &c., of Gardiner Spring, deceased, v. Francis H. Reed and others.
To render usury a defence on foreclosure, it must be shown that the usurious excess was received by the mortgagee, or his agent.
Bill to foreclose. On final hearing on pleadings and proofs.
Mr. E. A. S. Man, for complainant.
Mr. J. C. Potts, for answering defendants.

Opinion:
The Chancellor.
The only question submitted upon the hearing was, whether the defence of usury is established. The mortgagor evidently paid a large commission in the negotiation of the loan of $6,000, and it is probable that he paid a large one on the subsequent loan of $8,000; but it does not appear that Mrs. Spring, the mortgagee, or Seth G. Babcock, her agent in making the loans, received or had any benefit from those commissions. The proof is that she lent the whole of the $8,000. The defence of usury is not established, and there will be a decree for the complainant accordingly.