Legal Opinion · Dissent

Freitas v. Geddes Savings & Loan Ass'n

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 25, 1984Published

1DissentSimons, J.

I would reverse and grant judgment to plaintiffs because defendant charged them an unlawful rate of interest, not through excusable mistake, but knowingly. Having established that, plaintiffs had no obligation to go further and prove that defendant did so “clandestinely” with the specific intent to violate the usury laws or that its conduct amounted to a “subterfuge” or “ruse” to do so.

Analysis starts with the statute which prohibits savings and loan institutions from “knowingly taking, receiving, reserving, or charging * * * interest * * * at a rate greater than * * * authorized by law”…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Giventer v. ArnowNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Fiedler v. . DarrinNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  3. Rosenstein v. . FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
  4. Brown v. . RobinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
  5. Meaker v. . FieroNew York Court of Appeals · 1895

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

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

Powered by the Exa API