Babcock

Babcock v. Jewell

Good Law
110 Cal. App. 323·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 68·294 P. 30
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 10, 1930Docket No. 6420.California917 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Houser, J.

Plaintiff brought an action to recover from defendants alleged usurious interest and penalty for the exaction thereof. The original complaint contained the allegation that the defendants “did take and receive from the plaintiff herein the sum of three hundred seventy-two and 09/100 dollars ($372.09) for the loan by defendants to plaintiff of the sum of twelve hundred eighty-eight dollars ($1288.) in money for six (6) months, which said loan the plaintiff did fully repay; ... ”. Later, an amended complaint was filed by which it was charged that the amount received by defendants was $6,172 for a loan made by defendants to plaintiff of the sum of $4,500 for six months. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff in the sum of $2,557.71.

Among other defenses to the amended complaint, defendants Jewell alleged:

With reference to the facts upon which such defense was founded, the trial court found “that all the allegations of the answer (except certain facts not here material) are untrue”.

The only point expressly made by appellants in their opening brief is that the trial court erred in determining that plaintiff’s alleged cause of action was not barred by the statute of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.