Case Name: Samuel W. McCaulley and J. Augustus McCaulley, Executors of William McCaulley vs. William N. Ward and Robert D. Morse
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Jurisdiction: Delaware
Decision Date: 1896-02
Citations: 2 Marv. 183
Docket Number: 
Parties: Samuel W. McCaulley and J. Augustus McCaulley, Executors of William McCaulley vs. William N. Ward and Robert D. Morse.
Judges: 
Reporter: Delaware Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 183–184

Head Matter:
Samuel W. McCaulley and J. Augustus McCaulley, Executors of William McCaulley vs. William N. Ward and Robert D. Morse.
New Castle County,
February Term, 1896.
Usury. Pleading.—Usury in the original cause of action cannot be pleaded as a defence to a scire facias on a judgment confessed by warrant of attorney.
This was a scire facias to revive a judgment which had been confessed by virtue of a warrant of attorney.
J. W. Ponder, for the defendant,
filed an affidavit of defence which set forth that the debt upon which the judgment sought to be revived and recovered was usurious, and that the judgment and debt were usurious from the inception.
Samuel W. McCaulley, for the plaintiffs,
moved for judgment notwithstanding affidavit of defence, contending that the objection that a bond and warrant were usurious could not be taken advantage of upon a scire facias on the judgment confessed on the warrant. Lysle et al. vs. Williams’ Adm’s., 15 S. & R. 135.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Usury would be a matter of defence to the judgment, the scire facias being simply that execution may issue. Usury cannot be pleaded and is, therefore, no defence to a scire acias upon a judgment.