Legal Opinion

Norstar Bank v. Pickard & Anderson

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

Decided November 15, 1989PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

— Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: On a prior appeal, we determined that Norstar had charged a usurious rate of interest, but we declined to grant summary judgment in favor of defendants, noting that our order did not preclude a renewal of the motion after plaintiff had an opportunity to present evidence showing that the usurious rate was not "knowingly” charged (Norstar Bank v Pickard & Anderson, 140 AD2d 1002). Defendants renewed the motion. Norstar opposed the motion and cross-moved for summary judgment in its favor, stating that it did not intend to charge the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hotel Co. v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Freitas v. Geddes Savings & Loan Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Fiedler v. . DarrinNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  4. Moers v. American Exchange National BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
  5. Norstar Bank v. PickardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fareri v. Rain's International Ltd.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  2. Clark v. DabyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API