Waterman v. Witteman

25 A.D.2d 531, 267 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5039
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 7, 1966·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage on certain real property and for other relief, plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, entered August 18, 1965, as denied her motion for summary judgment. Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment granted, with $10 costs and disbursements. The defense of usury interposed in defendant’s answer was not available to him as a guarantor of the corporate obligation (General Phoenix Corp. v. Cabot, 300 N. Y. 87, 95; Salvin v. Myles Realty Co., 227 N. Y. 51, 58; Union Estates Co. v. Adlon Constr. Co., 221 N. Y. 183, 186; Rosa v. Butterfield, 33 N. Y. 665). The motion papers disclose no issues of fact requiring a trial and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted.

Ughetta, Acting P, J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

Waterman v. Witteman, 25 A.D.2d 531, 267 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5039 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

25 A.D.2d 531 (Waterman v. Witteman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Meadow Brook National Bank v. Recile
302 F. Supp. 62 (E.D. Louisiana, 1969)
Meadow Brook National Bank v. Massengill
285 F. Supp. 55 (E.D. Louisiana, 1968)