Legal Opinion
Greenfield v. Skydell
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 8, 1992PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered January 29, 1992, which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
We find that there is an issue of fact as to whether the transaction at issue was usurious. Intent is an essential element of usury (Freitas v Geddes Sav. & Loan Assn., 63 NY2d 254, 262). A defendant seeking to interpose the defense of usury must prove all of the essential elements thereof by clear evidence (Giventer v Arnow, 37 NY2d 305, 309). The court will not assume that the parties entered into an unlawful…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hammelburger v. Foursome Inn Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1981
- Giventer v. ArnowNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Freitas v. Geddes Savings & Loan Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Angelo v. BrennerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Schaaf v. BorsherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
3Cited by7 opinions
- Agway, Inc. v. North Clymer Farm Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Feivel Funding Associates v. BenderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Piccirilli v. BenjaminAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Transmedia Restaurant Co. v. 33 E. 61st Street Restaurant Corp.New York Supreme Court · 2000
- Hort v. DevineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.