Wycoff v. Longhead

Decision Date01 September 1785
Citation2 U.S. 92,1 L.Ed. 303,2 Dall. 92
PartiesWycoff v. Longhead *
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

This was an action on a promissory note; to which the defendant pleaded the act of Assembly against ufury; and thereupon the following points were ruled by the Court, in their charge to the Jury.

1st. That where more than legal interest was included in any note, bond, or specialty, the whole amount could not be sued for and recovered: But the plaintiff was entitled, in such case, to a verdict for the just principal and lawful interest.

2nd. That if a man, directly, or indirectly, actually receives more than six per cent, he incurs a forfeiture equal to the money &c. lent; but if an action is brought to recover the amount of the loan, a verdict ought not to be given for the defendant, as that would, in effect, be putting the money into his pocket, instead of working a forfeiture to the Commonwealth.

3rd. That a man may, bona fide, purchase any security for the payment of money, at the lowest rate he can, without incurring the penalties of ufury.

* This cause was tried on the 26th September, 1785.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • United States v. Hall
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • August 28, 1952
  • Brown v. Second National Bank of Erie
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • November 4, 1872
    ...limitation of the action for the penalty commences to run, but lawful interest may be recovered in an action for the principal: Wycoff v. Longhead, 2 Dall. 92; Turner v. Calvert, 12 S. & R. 46; Musgrave v. Gibbs, 1 Dall. 216; Kirkpatrick v. Houston, 4 W. & S. 115; Lamb v. Lindsey, Id. 44; T......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT