CONFLICT OF LAWS-EFFECTS USURY

Authors

Abstract

A Pennsylvania corporation entered into a contract in Maryland with the defendant credit company, a Delaware corporation, under which the defendant was to advance money upon the assignment to it of accounts, and furnish other services for which it was to receive certain definite fees and commissions. The parties stipulated in the contract that it should be governed as to its validity and interpretation by the laws of Delaware. The receivers of the Pennsylvania corporation brought this action to recover payments made to the defendant under the contract, claiming it to be usurious according to the law of Pennsylvania. Held, where usury is charged, if the contract is valid by the law of the place of performance or making, it is presumed that the parties contracted for lawful interest, and the contract is valid. This contract was valid by the law of Maryland. The stipulation in reference to the laws of Delaware was of no effect as that state had no relation to the transaction. Brierley v. Commercial Credit Co., 43 F.(2d) 730.

Recommended Citation

CONFLICT OF LAWS-EFFECTS USURY, 29 Mich. L. Rev. 775 (1931).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol29/iss6/19