Winter & Hirsch, Inc. v. Passarelli
Appellate Court of Illinois
259 N.E.2d 312 (1970)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Dominic and Antoinette Passarelli (defendants) obtained a $10,000 loan from Equitable Mortgage & Investment Corporation (Equitable). Under the promissory note, the Passarellis were to repay a total of $16,260 over a period of 60 months. The promissory note charged a usurious rate of interest that exceeded the amount allowed by law. Before the promissory note was executed, Winter & Hirsch, Inc. (Winter) (plaintiff), issued a check for $11,000 to Equitable with a notation that the funds were for the Passarellis’ loan. The Passarellis defaulted on the loan, and Winter sued the Passarellis, claiming to be a holder in due course of the promissory note. The Passarellis raised the defense of usury. The trial court found that Winter was a holder in due course of the promissory note, rejected the Passarellis’ defense of usury, and entered judgment in favor of Winter. The Passarellis appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McCormick, J.)
Dissent (Burke, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.