From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

P.J. Tierney Sons, Inc. v. Bajowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1931
233 App. Div. 766 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)

Opinion

May, 1931.


Order reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. The order denied a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to section 476 of the Civil Practice Act and rule 112 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The action is in replevin. The respondent concedes that the only question is whether the charging and acceptance of more than six per cent for extending a payment due under a conditional contract of sale constitutes usury. The transaction here involved is a sale of merchandise on credit, to which the usury laws have no application. The relation of lender and borrower is not involved. ( Orvis v. Curtiss, 157 N.Y. 657; Van Dyk v. Dujardin, 213 App. Div. 791; Dry Dock Bank v. American Life Ins. Trust Co., 3 N.Y. 344; Title Guaranty Surety Co. v. Klein, 178 Fed. 689.) Lazansky, P.J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

P.J. Tierney Sons, Inc. v. Bajowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1931
233 App. Div. 766 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)
Case details for

P.J. Tierney Sons, Inc. v. Bajowski

Case Details

Full title:P.J. TIERNEY SONS, INC., Appellant, v. MICHAEL BAJOWSKI, Respondent

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

Date published: May 1, 1931

Citations

233 App. Div. 766 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)

Citing Cases

Zachary v. Macy Co.

The argument assumes that the monthly rate provisions ("one and one-half per centum per month", or "one per…

People v. Guttin

The proof was that there was a sale of a used car on credit to the complainant, and that the difference…