127 Pa. 114 | Pa. | 1889
Opinion,
When this case was here before, 121 Pa. 582, the paper book of the defendant in error
All of these three payments were made after judgment had been confessed on the original bond; and, as the $300 note, given as a bonus, must be treated as a device to evade the usury laws, these payments upon it must be treated as payments upon the original debt. The bond and mortgage were given for the same debt as the judgment; the transaction was a mere change of securities for the same loan, and the law will apply the payments of usurious interest as payments upon the principal. Had this error of counsel, or of the printer, as the case may be, been called to our attention, we would have modified our opinion, and entered a judgment in accordance with the real facts of the case.
The judgment is reversed, and a venire facias de novo awarded.
Plaintiff in error, in that case.