Legal Opinion

Casten v. Tannenbaum

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 25, 1964PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

James A. Roe, Jr., J.

Plaintiff in this action to foreclose a mortgage moves for (a) summary judgment and (b) an order dismissing the defense and counterclaim of usury.

Defendant .Tannenbaum is the owner and mortgagor of the property. He is the only defendant appearing in the action.

Defendant does not allege that the mortgage agreement was invalid or usurious in its inception, but contends that at the time a mortgage extension agreement was entered into, he paid plaintiff a sum of money in excess of the legal rate of interest which payment, being usurious, rendered the extension agreement as…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Real Estate Trust Company v. . KeechNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
  2. President & Directors of the Manhattan Co. v. RudnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
  3. Sherling v. Gallatin Improvement Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
  4. Torre v. ZuzaNew York Supreme Court · 1961

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. First National Bank v. Mountain Food Enterprises, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  2. Eastern Shopping Centers, Inc. v. ControNew York Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Schindle v. Sharak (In re Salzman)District Court, S.D. New York · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API