DocketNumber: Nos. 7524, 7826.
Citation Numbers: 67 S.W.2d 429
Judges: BAUGH, Justice.
Filed Date: 4/19/1933
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 1/12/2023
This suit involves the same character of transaction as that involved in the case of M. L. Walker et al. v. Temple Trust Co. (Tex.Civ.App.)
The judgment, for the reasons stated in the Walker Case, is affirmed on the ground that the loan should not be construed as usurious in any event. And, even if it should be so construed, the appellant Walker could not recover what he had paid thereunder, because he expressly assumed the payment of a stipulated amount named in the conveyance to him, thereby precluding any right in him to assert usury, if any, in the original loan. See Jesse F. Moore v. Temple Trust Co. (Tex.Civ.App.)
For the reasons stated in the above-cited cases, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Applications for writs of error were made in both of the above cases. The Supreme Court granted a writ in the Walker Case, but refused a writ in the Moore Case. In view of these circumstances, therefore, we base our affirmance of this case upon the grounds stated in Moore v. Temple Trust Company, supra, and not as stated in our original opinion, upon the grounds set forth in Walker v. Temple Trust Company, supra. Based upon our second ground stated in the original opinion rendered herein, therefore, appellants' motion for rehearing is overruled.
Overruled.