Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1928

Common Finance Corp. v. Balsam

Common Finance Corp. v. Balsam
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 15, 1928
133 Misc. 512

Counsel

--, for the appellants., --, for the respondent.

Common Finance Corp. v. Balsam

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law, and new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to appellants to abide the event.

On this appeal the respondent states that it is incorporated under the Stock Corporation Law. On the trial the appellants attempted to show that the respondent was thus incorporated, and that in violation of the Banking Law (§ 140) it had as a business discounted notes, not only for its own stockholders, but for others. If the respondent was so engaged, it could not recover on the note sued upon here. (New York State Loan & Trust Co. v. Helmer, 77 N. Y. 64; Meserole Securities Co. v. Cosman, 131 Misc. 361; Royal Diamond Co., Inc., v. Ostrin, 133 id, 555.)

The appellants should have been permitted, moreover, to have given proof as to the defense of usury. Whether that defense is good can be determined only after all the facts are in the record.

All concur; present, Cropsey, MacCrate and Lewis, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.