WILLIAM MAHER AND EVELYN MAHER, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
SAUL KLINE AND SADYE KLINE, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision, holding that charges associated with a loan, including attorney and brokerage fees, were legitimate expenses and not usurious interest. The court found the borrowers failed to prove the charges were excessive or concealed.
The court held that the $1,500 charged for attorney fees, brokerage commission, and other incidental expenses were legitimate expenses of the loan and not usurious interest.
“The finding of the Chancellor as set forth in the final decree, that the $1,500 charged the borrowers constituted legitimate expenses of the loan, is presumed to be correct and the burden of showing the incorrectness of such decree was upon the appellants.”
Establishes the presumption of correctness for the lower court's findings and the burden of proof on the appellants.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellants, borrowers of $20,000, contended that a $1,500 charge for attorney fees, brokerage commission, and other expenses was excessive and con…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Broker'S Commission cases and more on FLexlaw
MATHEWS, Justice.
This case involves the question of usury. The principal contention is that the sum of $1,500, which covered attorneys’ fees, a brokerage commission and other incidental expenses in connection with a loan of $20,-000, was excessive and that the charges made were concealed usurious interest.
There was another issue of a $2,000 bonus which is not involved in this particular question.'
After answer was filed, the Chancellor found that the $1,500 was applied to actual expenses of the loan; such as, abstracting, recording fees, intangible taxes, and the balance for attorneys’ fees and brokerage fees. The lenders received none of the $1,500.
The finding of the Chancellor as set forth in the final decree, that the $1,500 charged the borrowers constituted legitimate expenses of the loan, is presumed to be correct and the burden of showing the incorrectness of such decree was upon the appellants. They have failed to meet this burdem
Affirmed.
ROBERTS, Q. J., and TERRELL and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shaffran v. Holness, 102 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)…paid him for his services in the latter capacity will not constitute usury,” citing Mason v. Cunningham, 111 Fla. 200, 149 So. 331. A brokerage commission, as well as other expenses, constitutes legitimate expenses of a loan. Maher v. Kline, Fla., 74 So. 2d 696. The burden was upon the borrowers to establish the existence of usury. The agent was not a party to this action. It is undisputed that plaintiff never had any interest in the agent, United, or ever engaged or paid them to do anything for him. He…
-
Cutri Enters., Inc. v. PAN Am. Bank OF Miami, 115 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)…was acting as the agent of the borrower, it has generally been held that a commission paid him for his services in the latter capacity will not constitute usury,’ citing Mason v. Cunningham, 111 Fla. 200, 149 So. 331.” In Maher v. Kline, Fla.1954, 74 So. 2d 696, the chancellor found that a sum of $1,500 which covered attorney’s fees, a brokerage commission, and other incidental expenses in connection with a loan of $20,000, was for the legitimate expenses of the loan. The Florida Supreme Court, in disposin…