Court Of Appeal Holds Note Investors May Be Liable For Usury

Earlier this week, the California Court of Appeal issued an opinion in a case that should be interesting reading for anyone dealing with promissory notes. In Creative Ventures, LLC v. Jim Ward & Associates, the court reached the following conclusions:

•Loans arranged by a corporation not licensed as a real estate broker are not entitled to the usury exemption for real estate secured loans made or arranged by a California licensed real estate broker (Cal. Civ. Code § 1916.1) even if the individual acting on behalf of the corporation was a licensed real estate broker.

•Investors in promissory notes may be liable for usury when the notes have not been negotiated to those investors and thus the investors were not holders in due course (see Cal. Comm. Code § 3305).

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP on:

Popular Topics
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.