Day v. Cohen
| Decision Date | 26 February 1896 |
| Citation | 43 N.E. 109,165 Mass. 304 |
| Parties | DAY v. COHEN et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Freeman
Hunt, for plaintiff.
Curry & Sondheim, for defendants.
The only question in this case is whether St.1892, c. 428, § 3, is applicable to a mortgage given at the time of sale to secure a part or the whole of the purchase price of household furniture bought by the mortgagor of the mortgagee. This section is as follows: "No mortgage of household furniture on which interest is charged at the rate of eighteen per centum or more, per annum, made to secure a loan of less than one thousand dollars, shall be valid unless it state with substantial accuracy the amount of the loan, the time for which the loan is made, the rate of interest to be paid and the actual expense of making and securing the loan, nor unless it contain a provision that the debtor shall be notified in the manner provided in section 7, chapter 192 of the Public Statutes of the time and place of any sale to be made in foreclosure proceedings, at least seven days before such sale." The statute is entitled, "An act relating to the discharge of small loans and the redemption of the security given for such loans." The first section in regard to the discharge of loans provides in each case for the payment of the "actual expense of making the loans and securing the same." The section quoted above refers exclusively to mortgages of household furniture, and the purpose of it apparently is to provide special safeguards for the protection of articles used in the households, which their owner, under the pressure of necessity, has conveyed as security for the payment of borrowed money. The provision requiring the insertion in the mortgage of a statement of the "actual expense of making and securing the loan" is not applicable to a mortgage like that in the case at bar. While, in a broad sense of the word, the credit given for the price of goods sold may be called a "loan," it is not a loan in the ordinary and usual sense of the word, and we think it is not a loan within the meaning of the statute. The language here used has reference primarily to money furnished to another, to be repaid; and it is not intended to include credits given for goods sold, upon which a mortgage is taken back by way of security. The ruling at the trial was correct. Judgment on the finding.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scientific Products v. Cyto Medical Laboratory, Inc.
...and it is not intended to include credits given for goods sold upon which a mortgage is taken back by way of security.' Day v. Cohen, 165 Mass. 304, 305, 43 N.E. 109. "The parties, however, must act in good faith, and where a contract appears as a sale but is in fact a mere cloak for an usu......
-
Gilman v. Raymond
...made to secure small loans, and do not apply to those which secure a sale of merchandise, such as the one in this case. See Day v. Cohen, 165 Mass. 304, 43 N. E. 109. But the assignment in question in terms exempted from its operation ‘three-fourths of the weekly earnings or wages' of Tobia......
-
Gilman v. Raymond
... ... employer in order to make an assignment valid against him, ... are applicable only to assignments made to secure small ... loans, and do not apply to those which secure a sale of ... merchandise, such as the one in this case. See Day v ... Cohen, 165 Mass. 304 ... But the assignment in question in ... terms exempted from its operation "three fourths of the ... weekly earnings or wages" of Tobias. See St. 1916, c ... 208. It was in effect an order on the employer to pay one ... fourth of the weekly wages of his employee to this ... ...
-
Moore's Estate, In re
...an indebtedness of the vendee for all or part of the price of property sold, secured by a mortgage back to the vendor. Day v. Cohen, 165 Mass. 304, 43 N.E. 109. To describe by such terms a mortgage in favor of a vendor upon land sold, when there is no one personally indebted or liable for t......