Nance v. . Welborne
Nance v. . Welborne
142 S.E. 477; 195 N.C. 459; 1928 N.C. LEXIS 121
(South Eastern Reporter)
Nance v. . Welborne
Opinion of the Court
A borrower employs an attorney and pays Mm $5.00 for preparing note and chattel mortgage and securing extension or renewal of a loan of $40.00 for 60 days. Does the payment of this fee to the borrower’s attorney amount to exaction of usury on the part of the lender who knew nothing of the arrangement between the borrower and his attorney? The question answers itself in the negative. Speas v. Bank, 188 N. C., 524, 125 S. E., 398; Miller v. Dunn and Abdallah v. Dunn, 188 N. C., 397, 124 S. E., 746; Waters v. Garris, 188 N. C., 305, 124 S. E., 334.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.