Jose N. Vazquez Figueroa v. Hon. Daniel D. Raulerson, in his Capacity etc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that to determine whether an instrument is a loan, “a court must examine whether the plaintiff is absolutely entitled to repayment under all circumstances” (emphasis added) (cleaned up)
• dismissing the defendants' usury counterclaim because business entities and their guarantors cannot assert usury as the basis for a claim under New York law
• affirming denial of motion to dismiss affirmative defenses alleging that transaction was criminally usurious loan after weighing only first and third factor
• denying motion to dismiss claim on the grounds that, inter alia, the reconciliation provision was subject to the lender’s sole discretion and therefore, suggested that the lender did not assume risk in entering the transaction
• discussing recourse in event of merchant bankruptcy as indicative of a loan
• “[The] court must examine whether the [transferor of funds] is absolutely entitled to repayment under all circumstances[, and if not], the transaction is not a loan.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).