Usury Defense

77 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• ST. Petersburg Bank & Tr. Co. v. Hamm
  414 So. 2d 1071· Fla.· 1982-05-13 ·cited 161×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict in usury law between two district courts regarding how to calculate whether a loan note exceeded usury limits when a loan charge was assessed. The Court held that section 687.03(3)'s spreading statute should be applied according to it
• Gunn Plumbing, Inc. v. The Dania Bank
  252 So. 2d 1· Fla.· 1971-07-28 ·cited 112×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a borrower may waive the affirmative defense of usury through a written stipulation settling a prior dispute, even though usury is a personal defense created by statute. The court rejected the borrower's argument that usury cannot be cured by s
• Wilson v. Conner
  106 Fla. 6· Fla.· 1932-06-14 ·cited 71×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a foreclosure decree after finding the lender violated usury laws by concealing $1,300 in interest within the principal of a negotiable promissory note. The court held that when usurious interest is actually reserved or exacted through a device
• Key W. Wharf & Coal Co. & Jeanette L. Murphy v. Louisa Porter
  63 Fla. 448· Fla.· 1912-01-01 ·cited 69×
  In this mortgage foreclosure case, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed that a purchaser at a foreclosure sale becomes subrogated to the mortgagee's rights and may foreclose multiple mortgages in a single action. The court held that defendants who claimed title through a party who
• Imfc Prof'l Servs. OF Fla., Inc. v. Latin Am. Home Health, Inc.
  676 F.2d 152· 5th Cir.· 1982-05-17 ·cited 54×
  The court held that removal was proper, and while the district court had discretion to remand after the federal defendant was dismissed, it did not abuse its discretion by proceeding to summary judgment because the remand motion was untimely. However, the court reversed the summa
• Spinney v. Winter Park Bldg. & Loan Ass'n
  120 Fla. 453· Fla.· 1935-07-23 ·cited 51×
  A Florida building and loan association sought to foreclose a mortgage on property that had changed ownership after the original loan. The court held that subsequent purchasers who acquire property subject to a pre-existing mortgage cannot defend against foreclosure on grounds of
• Coe v. Muller
  74 Fla. 399· Fla.· 1917-11-28 ·cited 49×
  Henry L. Coe appeals the dismissal of his usury defense in a mortgage foreclosure action, arguing that the 1909 Usury Act replaced the 1891 Act and changed the legal standard from strict liability for any usurious interest to liability only for willful violations. The Florida Sup
• Diversified Enters., Inc. v. West
  141 So. 2d 27· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-05-16 ·cited 33×
  A lender sought recovery on two promissory notes totaling $20,000 plus interest given as part of a real estate investment transaction. The trial court found civil usury and allowed recovery on only one note without interest, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the tran
• Indian Lake Ests., Inc. v. Special Invs., Inc.
  154 So. 2d 883· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-05-15 ·cited 28×
  Indian Lake Estates, Inc. (ILE) appeals a summary decree enforcing a settlement agreement requiring it to remit loan installment contract payments to Special Investments, Inc. The primary issue is whether the sale of installment contracts by ILE to various investment groups at a
• Goodman v. Olsen
  365 So. 2d 393· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-11-21 ·cited 27×
  Olsen appeals a partial summary judgment on a debt claim, arguing that the Florida Supreme Court's prior reversal did not definitively preclude him from raising a usury defense based on a $10,000 rebate demanded by Goodman. The court holds that the Supreme Court's decision consti
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Leach
  772 F.2d 1262· 6th Cir.· 1985-09-11 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge argues that the FDIC should not be immune from state law defenses like usury and failure of consideration when collecting on notes acquired in a purchase and assumption transaction, as this undermines borrower expectations and disrupts commercial relationship
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Lattimore Land Corp.
  656 F.2d 139· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-14 ·cited 22×
• Kraft v. Zelda Pincourt Mason
  668 So. 2d 679· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-02-28 ·cited 21×
  Mason lent money to her brother Kraft to finance federal antitrust litigation in exchange for a percentage of any recovery. When the suit settled for $5 million, Kraft withheld Mason's share. The trial court rejected champerty, usury, and statute of limitations defenses but misca
• Credit Indus. Co. v. Remark Chem. Co., Inc.
  67 So. 2d 540· Fla.· 1953-10-13 ·cited 21×
  Credit Industrial sought a declaratory judgment defining its rights under a new Florida statute regarding a financing contract with interest rates exceeding 10% per annum. The trial court granted Credit Industrial's motion for summary decree wholly in its favor, but Credit Indust
• Enstrom v. Dunning
  136 Fla. 253· Fla.· 1939-02-03 ·cited 21×
  In this usury case, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's finding of estoppel, holding that a mortgagor who stated the mortgage was "well secured" could not be estopped from asserting a usury defense where the note was past due when the assignee accepted it. The co
• Argintar v. Lydell
  132 Fla. 45· Fla.· 1938-04-07 ·cited 21×
  This case involves a mortgage foreclosure where the defendants claimed usury. The court affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that the loan was not usurious because the plaintiff did not willfully or knowingly exact any consideration beyond the agreed-upon interest, and th
• E. O. Painter Fertilizer Co. v. Foss
  107 Fla. 464· Fla.· 1932-12-27 ·cited 21×
  Three consolidated appeals in a mortgage foreclosure case where the defendant challenged procedural orders and the final foreclosure decree. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the final decree, finding sufficient evidence to support the chancellor's findings and holding that the
• Cont'l Mortg. Invs. v. Vill. BY THE SEA, Inc.
  252 So. 2d 833· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-09-09 ·cited 20×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision to overrule objections to interrogatories, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing discovery regarding other loans made by the plaintiff.
• Ayvas v. Green
  57 So. 2d 30· Fla.· 1952-02-22 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed whether a mortgage transaction was usurious. The court held that while the transaction was not criminally usurious, it was civilly usurious, leading to a forfeiture of double the interest charged. The case clarifies the application of usury law
• Phillips v. Lindsay
  102 Fla. 935· Fla.· 1931-09-19 ·cited 19×
  This case concerns the dismissal without prejudice of a mortgage foreclosure action in equity. The court affirmed the chancellor's discretionary dismissal, holding that while defendants raised affirmative defenses including usury, they failed to comply with procedural rules and c
• Mason v. Cunningham
  111 Fla. 200· Fla.· 1933-06-27 ·cited 18×
  In this mortgage foreclosure case, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's rejection of a usury defense, holding that a broker's commission paid by the borrower to obtain a loan does not constitute usury when the broker acts as the borrower's agent and the commission
• Raymond S. Hurley and related interests v. Slingerland
  461 So. 2d 282· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-01-04 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the partnership agreement and the executed promissory note, when read together, established the terms for repayment including interest, and that the transaction was not usurious.
• Benton v. Wilkins
  118 Fla. 491· Fla.· 1935-02-25 ·cited 15×
  This is an appeal from a foreclosure decree where the defendant claimed the underlying mortgage was usurious. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's finding that the usury defense was not established by clear and satisfactory evidence.
• Beach v. Great W. Bank
  670 So. 2d 986· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-01-31 ·cited 14×
  This is a case of first impression in Florida addressing whether a consumer can assert a right to rescind a mortgage under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) as a recoupment defense in a foreclosure action after the three-year statutory period has expired. The court holds that the t
• Antonelli v. Neumann
  537 So. 2d 1027· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-12-27 ·cited 14×
  Antonelli appeals a judgment in favor of lender Neumann on promissory notes for a $100,000 loan. The appellate court reversed, finding that the trial court's determination that the borrowers failed to prove usury was clearly erroneous based on evidence that the 2% payments ostens
• Dorothy M. Farish for Shirley F. Farish v. Courion Indus., Inc.
  754 F.2d 1111· 4th Cir.· 1985-02-11 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the anti-privity statute was intended to apply to the cases, reversing the majority's decision.
• Skinner v. The S. Home Bldg. & Loan Ass'n of Atlanta
  46 Fla. 547· Fla.· 1903-06-01 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision enforcing a mortgage executed by a borrowing member of a foreign building and loan association, holding that the fixed premium and interest charged violated Florida's usury statute because the 1893 act permitting such char
• The State of Fla. ex rel. THE Fla. BAR v. Delves
  160 So. 2d 114· Fla.· 1963-11-20 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Bar sought review of a Board of Governors' decision that reversed a referee's dismissal of charges against attorney George T. Delves, finding violations of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar.
• Sodi, Inc. v. Salitan
  68 So. 2d 882· Fla.· 1953-12-08 ·cited 12×
  A Florida corporation borrowed money on a chattel mortgage at an interest rate exceeding 10% per annum and sought to defend against foreclosure by pleading usury. The court held that the 1953 repeal of the statute prohibiting corporations from pleading usury restored that defense
• Schwab v. Quitoni
  362 So. 2d 297· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-07-05 ·cited 11×
  Andrew Schwab appeals a judgment against him on a promissory note signed by his development corporation. The trial court found Schwab personally liable as a guarantor despite his claim he signed only in a representative capacity, and rejected his usury defense.
• Bellman v. Yarmark Enters., Inc.
  180 So. 2d 663· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-11-09 ·cited 9×
  In this mortgage foreclosure appeal, homeowners Bellman challenged a foreclosure decree on usury grounds and sought to invoke Florida's balloon mortgage statute to forfeit interest payments. The Third District affirmed the foreclosure but reversed the dismissal of the counterclai
• N. Dade Church OF GOD, Inc. v. JM Statewide, Inc.
  851 So. 2d 194· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-06-18 ·cited 8×
  In a mortgage foreclosure dispute, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's rejection of the borrower's usury defense but reversed and remanded the attorney's fee award as excessive, requiring reduction based on principles excluding duplicative work,
• In re Lawson Square v. Lawson Square, Inc.
  816 F.2d 1236· 8th Cir.· 1987-04-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980, specifically Section 501, preempts state usury laws for loans secured by a first lien on residential real property, and thus there is no legal limit on interest rates for such loans in
• Hamm v. ST. Petersburg Bank & Tr. Co.
  379 So. 2d 1300· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-02-08 ·cited 8×
  This case addresses whether a mortgage note was usurious where a $5,800 loan charge was included in the stated principal of $290,000. The court held that the loan charge must be treated as interest, and under usury analysis, the loan exceeded the statutory maximum rate, reversing
• Sec. Inv. Co. OF ST. Louis v. Indian Waters Dev. Corp.
  501 F.2d 662· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-27 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the lender did not forfeit interest, the corporate loan was not a sham to evade usury laws, and prepayment provisions did not illegally increase the interest rate.
• Silver Sands OF Pensacola Beach, Inc. v. Pensacola Loan & Sav. Bank
  174 So. 2d 61· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-02-23 ·cited 8×
  Silver Sands of Pensacola Beach and the Seidels appealed a foreclosure judgment, arguing the bank violated Florida's usury laws by charging an effective interest rate exceeding the statutory limit when discounting eight percent interest in advance on a three-year installment loan
• Serotkin v. Flavin
  111 So. 2d 483· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-05-05 ·cited 8×
  In a mortgage foreclosure action, the lender sought to enforce a lien for the balance due on a $1,000 loan. The borrower claimed usury and sought return of all payments. The trial court found the borrower had fully repaid the actual principal received ($657.40) with an overpaymen
• Powell v. Weger
  97 So. 2d 617· Fla.· 1957-06-19 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a Chancellor may not refer an entire equity case to a special examiner for the taking of testimony over the objection of a litigant, even if the Chancellor's docket is congested. The court recognized that while rules authorize such referrals wi
• Brannon v. Blume
  61 Fla. 505· Fla.· 1911-01-01 ·cited 8×
  In this mortgage foreclosure case, the Florida Supreme Court upheld a decree ordering the sale of mortgaged property to satisfy an indebtedness. The defendants appealed on grounds including alleged usury, claims that the mortgaged property constituted their homestead, and that th
• Wulsin v. Palmetto Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n & 600 Inv. Corp.
  507 So. 2d 1149· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-05-12 ·cited 7×
  A limited partner in Beacon Reef sought to assert a usury defense on behalf of the partnership after the general partners waived it in a mortgage foreclosure action. The court reversed summary judgment for the lender, holding that a limited partner may bring a derivative action t
• Bettis v. Tampa Real Est. Exch. & Loan Ass'n
  62 Fla. 435· Fla.· 1911-06-01 ·cited 7×
  This case addresses whether a building and loan association's practice of charging a fixed premium on all borrowers, rather than through competitive bidding, constitutes usury. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's dismissal of the usury defense, holding that the s
• In re Dominelli v. Steinford Holding B.V.
  820 F.2d 313· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a bankruptcy trustee's court-approved settlement of a usury claim against a senior lienholder operates as res judicata, barring a junior lienholder from raising the same claim on behalf of the estate, and that California law does not permit a junior lienholder
• Zimmerman v. Hill
  100 So. 2d 432· Fla. 3d DCA· 1958-01-30 ·cited 6×
  In this mortgage foreclosure appeal, the court upheld a final foreclosure decree against both the original mortgagors (Mitchells) and subsequent grantees (Zimmermans), rejecting their usury defense. The court held that a grantee who takes a quitclaim deed with knowledge of a reco
• Sydnor J. Tucker v. Crown Corp.
  146 Fla. 329· Fla.· 1941-02-28 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy trustee and judgment creditor may assert the defense of usury against a mortgage creditor's claim to a surplus foreclosure fund, and that the trial court erred in appointing a receiver over property already in the trustee's control
• McGillick v. Chapman
  134 Fla. 220· Fla.· 1938-10-12 ·cited 6×
  McGillick sought to foreclose a mortgage, but the mortgagors (Chapmans) asserted usury as a defense, claiming the $4,400 note on a $4,000 loan with 8% interest exceeded the statutory 10% limit. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decree imposing forfeiture penalt
• Warren v. Seminole Bond & Mortg. Co.
  127 Fla. 107· Fla.· 1937-02-13 ·cited 6×
  This case involves a foreclosure action on a trust deed where the note was assigned to Dorothy Morgan before maturity. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decree, holding that Dorothy Morgan, as the owner of the secured note, is entitled to enforce the security i
• IOU Cent. Inc. v. Pezzano Contracting & Dev., LLC
  311 So. 3d 295· Fla. 2d DCA· 2020-11-13 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's award of attorney's fees to the borrowers, finding they were the prevailing parties. However, it reversed the trial court's amended final judgment, ruling it was improperly entered under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) and t
• Beachland Dev. Co. v. Axel Peterson
  111 Fla. 349· Fla.· 1933-10-09 ·cited 5×
  The Florida Supreme Court dismissed an appeal for lack of proper jurisdictional showing in the transcript, but upon reconsideration after briefing on the merits, denied the motion to dismiss and affirmed the lower court's order striking certain pleadings, finding no reversible er
• Velletri v. Dixon
  44 So. 3d 187· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-09-10 ·cited 4×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a foreclosure judgment, holding that a mortgage loan secured by a promissory note was criminally usurious at its inception because the effective interest rate, calculated according to statutory methodology, exceeded 25 percent when wi
• Goldome Sav. Bank v. Wulsin
  530 So. 2d 291· Fla.· 1988-09-01 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a limited partner may assert a usury defense on behalf of a limited partnership when the general partners refuse to do so, despite statutory language limiting limited partners' participation in partnership proceedings. The court approved the Th