Legal Opinion

Mittman v. Kuo

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 16, 1957PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGeobge P. Stier, J.

In an action to foreclose a second mortgage on real property, the defendants interposed the defenses of usury and violations of section 131 of the Banking Law and section 18 of the General Corporation Law. Both sides have moved for summary judgment, and the People of the State of New York, not originally made a party to this action, have moved by the Attorney-General permanently to enjoin the plaintiffs from prosecuting their action and enforcing the bond, note, mortgage and assignment recited in the complaint and to dismiss the same and to decree that the State’s lien for alleged unpaid…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jenkins v. MoyseNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. Werger v. Haines Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1951
  3. New York Credit Men's Ass'n v. Manufacturers Discount Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1948
  4. Williams-Dexter Co. v. Dowland Realty Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
  5. Bradley v. SelengutAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Amherst Factors, Inc. v. KochenburgerNew York Court of Appeals · 1958
  2. Sohmer Factors Corp. v. 278 Corp.Long Beach City Court · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API