Opinion
November 5, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the petitioners' contention, we find that the Supreme Court properly rejected their claim of usury. The so-called "loan transaction" in this case, a contractual arrangement between the parties, entitled the respondent sellers, John V. Torrisi, Joseph L. Torrisi and Angelo M. Torrisi, to receive an interest in a cooperative conversion plan upon their execution of a document evidencing a satisfaction of a purchase-money mortgage they took back as part of the sale of their apartment building to the petitioner purchasers. Thus, there was no loan or forebearance of money, a necessary requirement before there can be a finding of usury (see, General Obligations Law § 5-501; Szerdahelyi v. Harris, 67 N.Y.2d 42, 46; Orvis v. Curtiss, 157 N.Y. 657; DeSimon v. Ogden Assocs., 88 A.D.2d 472, 477-481).
We have considered the petitioners' remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.