PORES v. BLUMENBERG, INC., 249 N.Y. 196 (1928)

163 N.E. 607

CELIA PORES, Respondent, v. H. BLUMENBERG, INC., et al., Appellants.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.Argued October 17, 1928
Decided October 26, 1928

Page 197

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

Charles J. McDermott for appellants.

Maxwell Arent and Frank Comesky for respondent.

Per Curiam.

The defendant agreed to loan to the plaintiff the sum of twenty thousand dollars to be secured by a first mortgage on plaintiff’s property. The plaintiff agreed that the lender might charge the sum of three thousand dollars and might retain that amount out of the twenty thousand dollars loaned. The transaction has been carried out exactly as the parties agreed. At the time of closing the lender handed to the plaintiff a check for twenty thousand dollars which the plaintiff then indorsed and handed back to the lender’s attorney. At the direction of the plaintiff and in her behalf he disbursed the moneys loaned to the plaintiff, retaining only the sum of three thousand dollars. The statement of the disbursements describes the three thousand dollars as a fee and brokerage to the attorney.

Apparently the agreement that the lender might retain three thousand dollars as a charge for making the loan was usurious, but the mortgage has been paid by a subsequent purchaser of the real property. Concededly, lapse of time has barred any action brought in accordance

Page 198

with the provisions of section 372 of the General Business Law to recover the moneys which have been wrongfully exacted for the loan. Uncontradicted evidence produced by the plaintiff herself shows that she has received from the lender or that the lender has paid in her behalf all the moneys which it was agreed that she should receive from the loan. No basis in law remains for any recovery by the plaintiff at this time.

The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term should be reversed and complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts.

CARDOZO, Ch. J., POUND, CRANE, ANDREWS, LEHMAN, KELLOGG and O’BRIEN, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 163 N.E. 607

Recent Posts

CORDAS v. PEERLESS TRANSP. CO., 27 N.Y.S.2d 198 (1941)

27 N.Y.S.2d 198 CORDAS et al. v. PEERLESS TRANSP. CO. et al. City Court of…

1 week ago

WOOD v. DUFF-GORDON, Wood v. Duff-Gordon, 222 N.Y. 88 (1917)

222 N.Y. 88 (1917) Dec 4, 1917 · New York Court of Appeals Otis F. Wood, Appellant,…

3 weeks ago

RAHABI v. MORRISON, 81 A.D.2d 434

81 A.D.2d 434 (1981) 440 N.Y.S. 2d 941 Aharon Rahabi, Appellant, v. Jack Morrison et…

3 weeks ago

MATTER OF SCHLINGER, 48 Misc.2d 345 (1965)

48 Misc.2d 345 (1965) In the Matter of The Estate of Joseph Schlinger, Deceased. Surrogate's…

3 weeks ago

BARTOLONE v. JECKOVICH, 481 N.Y.S. 2d 545 (1984).

103 A.D.2d 632 (1984)481 N.Y.S. 2d 545 Angelo J. Bartolone, Appellant, v. Lynne A. L.…

3 weeks ago

Matter of C.C. v D.C., 2025 NY Slip Op 05017 (Sept. 18, 2025)

Matter of C.C. v D.C. 2025 NY Slip Op 05017 Decided on September 18, 2025…

2 months ago