
    William Schweizer and Josephine Schweizer, Respondents, v. William P. Hickok, Appellant, Impleaded with Others, Defendants.
    
      Usury.
    
    Appeal by the defendant, William P. Hickok, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Special Term, made and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Westchester on the 22d day of October, 1912.
   Rich, J.:

This appeal is from a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in an action brought to foreclose a mortgage given by defendant William P. Hickok to plaintiffs to secure the payment of $2,000. The defense of usury is interposed, and while the record discloses .that the attorney who represented the plaintiffs took advantage of defendant’s necessity to the extent of deducting $400 from the $2,000 loaned, there is no evidence that any part of this sum wa,s returned to the mortgagees; in fact, it appears that none was returned. Under the circumstances we must affirm the judgment, hut it will be Without costs. The judgment should be affirmed, without costs. Burr, Thomas, Carr and Stapleton, JJ., concurred. Judgment affirmed, without costs.  