From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mahler v. Bernsley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 25, 1999
265 A.D.2d 531 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Argued September 17, 1999

October 25, 1999

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Gilda Bernsley appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCaffrey, J.).


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant did not meet her burden of establishing usury by clear and convincing evidence (see, Giventer v. Arnow, 37 N.Y.2d 305 ;Lloyd Capital Corp. v. Pat Henchar, Inc., 80 N.Y.2d 124 ; Feinberg v. Old Vestal Rd. Assocs., 157 A.D.2d 1002 ).

The appellant's remaining contentions do not require reversal.

JOY, J.P., FRIEDMANN, GOLDSTEIN, and McGINITY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mahler v. Bernsley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 25, 1999
265 A.D.2d 531 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Mahler v. Bernsley

Case Details

Full title:MARTIN MAHLER, et al., respondents, v. GILDA BERNSLEY, appellant, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 25, 1999

Citations

265 A.D.2d 531 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
696 N.Y.S.2d 870

Citing Cases

Zhavoronkin v. Koutmine

Further, the Supreme Court properly determined that the loan was not usurious ( see General Obligations Law §…

Ujueta v. Euro-Quest Corp.

Whether a transaction constitutes a "cover for usury" is a question of fact ( Hicki v. Choice Capital Corp.,…