84 Ala. 88 | Ala. | 1887
The first Charge given by the court, at the request of the defendant, asserted that the statement
It is insisted, that although defendants’ mortgage was not recorded until May 14th, 1884 — subsequently to tbe plaintiffs’ — it was executed on April 18th of the same year, prior
The third charge given by the court at the request of the defendants was in conflict with these views in making the retention to retain more than eight per cent, per annum by the lender the sole test of an intent to make a usurious loan. The contract did not import usury on its face, and the burden was cast on the defendants to show it was vitiated by the requisite illegal intent, which was a question proper to be submmitted to the jury. This inquiry was, by the third
The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.