Balk v. Frank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Balk v. Frank

29 A.D.2d 685, 288 N.Y.S.2d 221, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4760

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 29, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 685 (Balk v. Frank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Balk v. Frank, 29 A.D.2d 685, 288 N.Y.S.2d 221, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to declare void and to cancel for usury a mortgage on plaintiffs’ property, defendants appeal from (1) a decision of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 26, 1967, denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint and for summary judgment and granting plaintiffs’ request for summary judgment in their favor and (2) a judgment of said court made accordingly on May 5, 1967. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs, and motions denied. No questions of fact were considered on this appeal. In our opinion, the following triable issues of fact are presented: (1) whether the loan was made to the individual plaintiffs or to 164 Abbey Cleaners, Inc.; and (2) if the loan was made to the corporation, whether it was “wilfully and knowingly” made at a rate exceeding 25% per annum within the meaning of the applicable statutes (Penal Law, § 2401; General Obligations Law, § 5-521, subd. 3; see, Morrison v. Verdinal, 53 Hun 63, 65, affd. sub nom. Lydecker v. Verdinal, 126 N. T. 630; American Sur. Go. of N. 7. v. Sullivan, 7 F. 2d 605, 606). Appeal dismissed insofar as it is from the decision, without costs. No appeal lies from a decision. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to declare void and to cancel for usury a mortgage on plaintiffs’ property, defendants appeal from (1) a decision of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 26, 1967, denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint and for summary judgment and granting plaintiffs’ request for summary judgment in their favor and (2) a judgment of said court made accordingly on May 5, 1967. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs, and motions denied. No questions of fact were considered on this appeal. In our opinion, the following triable issues of fact are presented: (1) whether the loan was made to the individual plaintiffs or to 164 Abbey Cleaners, Inc.; and (2) if the loan was made to the corporation, whether it was “wilfully and knowingly” made at a rate exceeding 25% per annum within the meaning of the applicable statutes (Penal Law, § 2401; General Obligations Law, § 5-521, subd. 3; see, Morrison v. Verdinal, 53 Hun 63, 65, affd. sub nom. Lydecker v. Verdinal, 126 N. T. 630; American Sur. Go. of N. 7. v. Sullivan, 7 F. 2d 605, 606). Appeal dismissed insofar as it is from the decision, without costs. No appeal lies from a decision. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 685, 288 N.Y.S.2d 221, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/balk-v-frank-nyappdiv-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack