Illescas v. Baris
211 So. 3d 270, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 1170
Opinion
We affirm the summary judgment entered. Appellant contends that the issue of whether the note in question in this case was usurious was not conclusively refuted in the record. The note on its face is not usurious, and appellant’s affidavit which merely states that the note was usurious without any calculations is insufficient to raise an issue of material fact. Eastland Inv. Co. v. Baker, 344 So.2d 882 (Fla. 3d DCA1977).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Illescas v. Baris, 211 So. 3d 270, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 1170 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).
211 So. 3d 270 (Illescas v. Baris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Eastland Investment Co. v. Baker
344 So. 2d 882 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)