Common Finance Corp. v. Balsam

133 Misc. 512
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedOctober 15, 1928
StatusPublished

This text of 133 Misc. 512 (Common Finance Corp. v. Balsam) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Common Finance Corp. v. Balsam, 133 Misc. 512 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law, and new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to appellants to abide the event.

On this appeal the respondent states that it is incorporated under the Stock Corporation Law. On the trial the appellants attempted to show that the respondent was thus incorporated, and that in violation of the Banking Law (§ 140) it had as a business discounted notes, not only for its own stockholders, but for others. If the respondent was so engaged, it could not recover on the note sued upon here. (New York State Loan & Trust Co. v. Helmer, 77 N. Y. 64; Meserole Securities Co. v. Cosman, 131 Misc. 361; Royal Diamond Co., Inc., v. Ostrin, 133 id, 555.)

The appellants should have been permitted, moreover, to have given proof as to the defense of usury. Whether that defense is good can be determined only after all the facts are in the record.

All concur; present, Cropsey, MacCrate and Lewis, JJ.

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

Related

N.Y. State Loan and Trust Co. v. . Helmer
77 N.Y. 64 (New York Court of Appeals, 1879)
Meserole Securities Co. v. Cosman
131 Misc. 361 (New York Supreme Court, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
133 Misc. 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/common-finance-corp-v-balsam-nyappterm-1928.