AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

GEORGE CRAWFORD, JR., Respondent, v. WILLIAM CARLTON, Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 7, 1978, granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, and summary judgment granted to the defendant dismissing the complaint, without costs and disbursements. The promissory demand note dated July 29, 1976, in the principal amount of $50,000, with interest at the rate of 10% per annum, is patently usurious and, therefore, void under section 5-511 Gen. Oblig. of the General Obligations Law. Section 5-519 Gen. Oblig. of the General Obligations Law "was never intended and cannot be construed to emasculate [General Business Law, § 373 (now General Obligations Law, § 5-511)]" (Bowery Sav. Bank v. Nirenstein, 269 N.Y. 259, 264). When a note reserves to the lender an illegal rate of interest, that will satisfy the borrower's burden of proving a usurious loan (Matter of Dane, 55 A.D.2d 224).

Concur — Fein, J.P., Sandler, Sullivan, Bloom and Lupiano, JJ.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CRAWFORD v. CARLTON
(Dec 6, 1979)