USURY – New York Appellate Digest https://www.newyorkappellatedigest.com Wed, 09 Sep 2020 00:04:30 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.1 https://www.newyorkappellatedigest.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Favicon-Blue-01-36x36.png USURY – New York Appellate Digest https://www.newyorkappellatedigest.com 32 32 171315692 Promissory Note Reflecting a Loan to a Limited Liability Company Was Criminally Usurious As Well As Void Under the General Obligations Law—Provision Purporting to Reduce the Interest Rate to a Non-Usurious Rate If the Original Rate Were Found to be Usurious Did Not Save the Note https://www.newyorkappellatedigest.com/2015/05/27/promissory-note-reflecting-a-loan-to-a-limited-liability-company-was-criminally-usurious-as-well-as-void-under-the-general-obligations-law-provision-purporting-to-reduce-the-interest-rate-to-a-non-u/ Wed, 27 May 2015 04:00:00 +0000 http://newyorkappellatedigest.com/?p=18438 The Second Department determined a promissory note imposing an annual interest rate of more than 25% (60% here) was criminally usurious (Penal Law 190.40) and could not be saved by a provision purporting to reduce the interest rate to a non-usurious rate if the original rate were found to be usurious. The court noted that, although a limited liability company (the defendant here) cannot assert the defense of civil usury, a limited liability company can assert the defense of criminal usury.  In addition, the note was void under General Obligations Law 5-511 because the interest rate exceeded 16%. Fred Schutzman Co. v Park Slope Advanced Med., PLLC, 2015 NY Slip Op 04447, 2nd Dept 5-27-15

 

]]>
18438