Garvin v. Linton’s Empirical Analysis
1896
Citation profile
46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently October 1985 · most notably Covington v. Fisher (1908), Briggs v. Steele (1909)
46 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Hammond v. Hopping · German Bank v. DeShon · Morton v. . Thurber · Lukens v. Hazlett · Guggenheimer v. . Geiszler
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““’There must be an intent to take unlawful interest, to constitute usury. There can be no usury when the amount taken in the contmct for interest in excess of ten per cent, per annum was reserved through a mistake or ignorance of the fact that it was in such excess. If the lender, by mistake of fact, by error in calculation, or by inadvertence in the insertion of a date, contracts to receive an illegal rate of interest, ‘such mistake, error, or inadvertence will not stamp the taint of usury on such engagement, nor- cause to be visited upon him, who did not knowingly and intentionally disregard the law in this behalf, the highly-penal consequences of an usurious offense.’ ” 62 Ark. 380 , 35 S. W. 433 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. Grundy · Hinton v. Brown““Many authorities hold that ‘it is not enough that the borrower intended to make a usurious agreement, but the intention to take the usury must have been in full contemplation of the parties—not of one party, but of both—to the transaction. There must'be an aggregatio mfentium.’ [Citing authorities to sustain that view.] While others say that, if the lender knowingly contracts for an illegal rate of interest, the contract is usurious, although the borrower is ignorant of the facts. [Citing authorities to sustain that view.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. Grundy““According to those decisions, there need not be, under our statute, a mutual agreement to give and receive unlawful interest, to constitute usury. If it be actually ‘reserved, taken, or secured, or agreed to be taken or reserved,’ tlie contract is void for usury. As it may be reserved, taken, or secured by contract without the knowledge of both parties, a concurrence of the intent of both of them is not an essential element of usury, under the statute.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. Grundy
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.