Greenberg v. Nusbaum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greenberg v. Nusbaum

115 A.D.2d 587, 496 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55010

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

DecidedDecember 16, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 115 A.D.2d 587 (Greenberg v. Nusbaum) 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

Greenberg v. Nusbaum, 115 A.D.2d 587, 496 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55010 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover on promissory notes, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.), dated September 24, 1984, which was in plaintiffs’ favor in the principal sum of $25,000 plus interest at the statutory rate from November 1, 1976.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

The issue of usury was presented to Trial Term on a stipulated set of facts. Unfortunately, the parties decided to leave out certain crucial facts leaving it up to the court to draw certain inferences which they now debate. Under all the circumstances, we conclude that an affirmance is appropriate. Lazer, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover on promissory notes, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ramirez, J.), dated September 24, 1984, which was in plaintiffs’ favor in the principal sum of $25,000 plus interest at the statutory rate from November 1, 1976.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

The issue of usury was presented to Trial Term on a stipulated set of facts. Unfortunately, the parties decided to leave out certain crucial facts leaving it up to the court to draw certain inferences which they now debate. Under all the circumstances, we conclude that an affirmance is appropriate. Lazer, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 A.D.2d 587, 496 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenberg-v-nusbaum-nyappdiv-1985.