# Skelton Motor Co. v. Brown

> Supreme Court of Arkansas · March 7, 1960 · 231 Ark. 801

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7815600

## Case

- **Full name:** Skelton Motor Co., Inc. v. Brown
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Arkansas
- **Decided:** March 7, 1960
- **Citations:** 231 Ark. 801; 332 S.W.2d 607; 1960 Ark. LEXIS 318
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by McFaddin
- **Judges:** McFaddin, Smith
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7815600

## Opinion text

Ed. F. McFaddin, Associate Justice, (Concurring). I concur in the reversal of the judgment. It has always been my understanding that usury must be both pleaded and proved. Commercial Credit Co. v. Chandler, 218 Ark. 966 , 239 S. W. 2d 1009 ; and Cox v. Darragh, 227 Ark. 399 , 299 S. W. 2d 193 . Usury is a question of fact; and, like limitations, cannot be claimed by demurrer unless the fact of usury clearly appears on the face of the complaint. 55 Am. Jur. 435 , “Usury” § 162. In the case at bar, usury did not appear on the face of the complaint; and yet the defendant attempted to urge usury by demurrer. I think it was improper to sustain such demurrer. Court proceedings should not be “short-circuited”.
The majority opinion compounds the “short-circuiting” by finding, as a fact, that there was no usury. The majority may be correct pn such fact question; but I never reach that issue because I think the demurrer should have been overruled and the defendant allowed to -plead further.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7815600. Public record. Not legal advice.