Federal Insurance Co. v. Robinson

• Decision Date: 10 October 1876
• Citation: 82 Pa. 357
• Parties: Federal Insurance Co. <I>versus</I> Robinson.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Page 357

82 Pa. 357

Federal Insurance Co. versus Robinson.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

October 4, 1876.

October 10, 1876.

October 4th 1876.

Before AGNEW, C. J., SHARSWOOD, MERCUR, GORDON, PAXSON and WOODWARD, JJ. WILLIAMS, J., absent

Error to the Court of Common Pleas, No. 1, of Allegheny county: Of October and November Term 1876, No. 145.

Samuel C. Schoyer, for plaintiff in error.—Was the payment of the debt voluntary? The bond, the evidence of the debt, had been merged in a judgment. A writ of fieri facias had issued thereon and been returned, and an execution attachment was issued, summoning James P. Speer and others as garnishees, attaching moneys in their hands belonging to said Robinson, and on the answers filed by the garnishees to interrogatories served on them, the court granted judgment, and ordered the garnishees to pay the amount of the judgment, and in default execution to issue. Under stress of this judgment and order, the garnishees paid the judgment, recovering back from Robinson, by subsequent proceedings in the Orphans' Court, the amount paid by them. In all these proceedings Robinson has been in court, and the money having been made thereunder, it was certainly made by legal constraint and can in no sense be called a voluntary payment, unless that word, as used in the Act of May 22d 1858, Pamph. L. 622, bears the very opposite from its usual signification: Troubat & Haly's Pr., vol. 2, p. 8. If the garnishees improvidently paid the judgment, Robinson certainly has his remedy.

W. H. McGary, for defendant in error.—Whether the contract was completed by a compulsory process, or voluntarily, matters not, so far as the rights of the borrower are concerned, as he is not required to pay the excess over the legal rate: Philanthropic Building Association v. McKnight, 11 Casey 470; Heath v. Page, 13 P. F. Smith 108. The receiving of excessive interest is a public evil and prohibited: Campbell v. Sloan, 12 P. F. Smith 481; Lucas v. Government National Bank, 28 Id. 232.

Mr. Justice SHARSWOOD delivered the opinion of the court, October 10th 1876.

While it is well settled, as a general principle, that money voluntarily paid upon a claim of right cannot be recovered back, an exception has been recognised in the case of usury so paid. The reason of this exception is stated to be that it is money obtained by oppression and by taking advantage of the distresses of others, in violation of a law made for their protection. It is not therefore a voluntary payment; for the parties are not in pari delicto: Thomas v. Shoemaker, 6 W. & S. 183. The Act of Assembly of May 22d 1858, Pamph. L. 622, has not changed this rule, but has put a new period of limitation to an action to reclaim the usury, by providing that "in all cases where any borrower or debtor shall heretofore or hereafter have voluntarily paid the whole debt or sum loaned, together with the interest exceeding the lawful rate, no action to recover back any such excess shall be sustained in any court of this...