Simsbury Fund, Inc. v. New St. Louis Associates

Decision Date19 May 1994
Citation204 A.D.2d 182,611 N.Y.S.2d 557
PartiesThe SIMSBURY FUND, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The NEW ST. LOUIS ASSOCIATES, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Before CARRO, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, WALLACH, KUPFERMAN and TOM, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Resettled judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.; upon decision of Eugene Nardelli, J.), entered October 5, 1993, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about October 25, 1993, which dismissed plaintiff's complaint after trial on the ground that the agreements sued upon were usurious and void, and denied plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 to set aside Justice Nardelli's decision, respectively, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The provision in the subject agreements permitting plaintiff to demand, as it did, interest not only on the money it advanced to defendant but also on the escrowed funds to which defendant had no access made the agreements usurious since, as the IAS court found, it effectively required defendant to make combined interest payments at an annual rate of approximately 80% (Penal Law § 190.40; see, East Riv. Bank v. Hoyt, 32 N.Y. 119). We also agree with the IAS court that the possibility of a nonusurious rate of interest in the event of defendant's full performance under the agreements, and language therein purporting to reduce the interest rate to the legal rate in the event of a finding of usury, do not make the subject agreements nonusurious (see, Durst v. Abrash, 22 A.D.2d 39, 42, 253 N.Y.S.2d 351, affd 17 N.Y.2d 445, 266 N.Y.S.2d 806, 213 N.E.2d 887).

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Outreach v. Ya Global Inv.S
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of New Jersey
    • October 6, 2010
    ...the legal rate in the event of a finding of usury, do not make the subject agreements nonusurious. Simbury Fund, Inc. v. New St. Louis Assocs., 611 N.Y.S.2d 557, 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994) (citing Durst v. Abrash, 22 A.D.2d 39, 42, 253 N.Y.S.2d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 1964)). Likewise, the Supre......
  • NV One, LLC v. Potomac Realty Capital, LLC
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Superior Court
    • December 16, 2011
    ...itself. See In re Swartz, 37 B.R. at 778 (calculating permissible interest rate based on amount received by borrower); see also Simsbury Fund, 611 N.Y.S.2d at 558 (holding containing savings clause usurious where lender held portion of loan in escrow out of reach of borrower but charged int......
  • Am. E Grp. LLC v. Livewire Ergogenics Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • January 28, 2020
    ...reduce the interest rate to the legal rate in the event of a finding of usury, do not make the subject agreementsnonusurious." Simsbury Fund, 611 N.Y.S.2d at 557. Accordingly, the Court holds that the Note is criminally usurious on its face.14 The same logic compels the conclusion that Sect......
  • NV One, LLC v. Potomac Realty Capital, LLC
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Superior Court
    • December 16, 2011
    ...896 (N.C. 1991) (reasoning usury savings clause contravenes North Carolina's statutory policy); Simsbury Fund, Inc. v. New St. Louis Assocs., 611 N.Y.S.2d 557, 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994) (holding savings clause does not make loan non-usurious in New York). New York, like Rhode Island, declar......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT