Ames v. Benjamin
| Decision Date | 29 November 1898 |
| Citation | 77 N.W. 230,74 Minn. 335 |
| Parties | AMES v. BENJAMIN. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from district court, Todd county; L. L. Baxter, Judge.
Action by Charles A. Ames against Peter Benjamin. Finding for defendant. From an order refusing a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.
1. The general principle in relation to contracts made in one place, to be executed in another, such as promissory notes executed and delivered in one state and made payable in another, is that they are to be governed by the law of the place of performance, and, if the interest allowed by the law of the place of performance is higher than that permitted at the place of the delivery of the contract, the parties may stipulate for the higher rate of interest without incurring the penalties of usury, providing this be done without any intent to evade the usury law of the place of the contract.
2. An intent to evade the usury laws of this state will not be inferred from the mere fact that the payees of a note executed and delivered in Minnesota, bona fide residents of another state, in which the stipulated rate of interest was lawful, made such note payable at their usual place of business in such other state. Geo. S. Grimes, for appellant.
L. M. Davis and N. H. Miner, for respondent.
The chattel mortgage upon which plaintiff relied to support his claim of ownership and right of possession was executed, acknowledged, and delivered in this state, and by a resident thereof, this defendant. The mortgaged property was then in this state, and delivery thereof to the mortgagor, as vendee, by the mortgagees, as vendors, was simultaneous with the delivery of the mortgage. The notes secured by the last-mentioned instrument were executed and delivered at the same time and place to one of the firm of Proper & Harwood, payees, who resided at Wahpeton, N. D. Each was dated at said Wahpeton, bore interest at the rate of 12 per cent. per year, and was made payable at the payees' office at said Wahpeton. As will have been noticed, the rate of interest fixed in these instruments was usurious, under the statute of Minnesota; but, so far as shown by the evidence, there was nothing in the transaction which indicated any attempt on the part of the payees to evade our usury laws, unless such attempt is to be inferred from the mere fact that the notes were made payable in North Dakota, and drew a rate of interest in excess of that permitted in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Swedish-American National Bank of Minneapolis And Others v. First National Bank of Gardner
... ... Lewiston, 150 N.Y. 314; ... Waverly v. Hall, 150 Pa. St. 466; Shoe v ... Wood, 142 Mass. 563; Abt v. American, 159 Ill ... 467; Ames v. Benjamin, 74 Minn. 335 ... If the ... law of the situs is the proper law, then respondent's ... receipt was invalid and ... ...
-
EC Warner Co. v. WB Foshay Co.
... ... Ober, 172 Minn. 349, 215 N. W. 781; Ames v. Benjamin, 74 Minn. 335, 77 N. W. 230; Gilbert v. Fosston Mfg. Co., 174 Minn. 68, 216 N. W. 778, 218 N. W. 451; Green v. Trust Co., 128 Minn. 30, ... ...
-
Swedish-American Nat. Bank v. First Nat. Bank
... ... It was followed and applied in Ames v. Benjamin, 74 Minn. 335, 77 N. W. 230. In that case, defendant, a resident of this state, made and delivered to plaintiff his promissory note ... ...
-
Patterson v. Wyman
... ... Its validity was therefore governed by the laws of North Dakota, notwithstanding the fact that it was secured by mortgage on Minnesota lands. Ames v. Benjamin, 74 Minn. 335, 77 N. W. 230;Manhattan Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 188 N. Y. 108, 80 N. E. 658,6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1142,11 Ann. Cas ... ...