24 Pa. Super. 260 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1904
Opinion by
This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the court below which we have this day modified in disposing of an appeal by the plaintiff. The defendant complains that the learned judge of the court below held that “ the collection of fines was not usurious.” The record does not disclose any such ruling, the finding of the court below was directly to the contrary and is based upon the ground that the plaintiff “ had no right to contract in any manner for the payment of more than six per cent interest upon the loan made by it to the defendant.” There was no evidence that the defendant ever paid any fines. The calculation embodied in the findings of the
Payment of dues upon stock, by a borrowing stockholder, is not ipso facto an application of the money so paid to the reduction of his mortgage debt; in order to so effectuate the application of payments on the stock to the debt, there must be an act of appropriation by one or other of the parties: North America Building Association v. Sutton, 35 Pa. 463; Erthal v. Glueck, 10 Pa. Superior Ct. 402. The assignments of error are without merit, and the appeal is dismissed at the costs of the appellant.