Usury Argument in Merchant Cash Advance Suit Backfires Horribly

| By:

law booksA New York Supreme Court judge in Erie County, New York has had enough with attorneys trying to argue that merchant cash advances are loans. In Yellowstone Capital, LLC v. Central USA Wireless, LLC et al (Index No: 811837-2017), the Honorable Timothy J. Walker balked at the defendants’ argument that the MCA agreement was usurious.

“The only ‘proof’ that Defendants submit in support of their usury claim are self-serving misconstructions of cherry-picked provisions of the merchant agreement, and an outright disregard for contrary provisions contained in that document,” he opined.

Citing dozens of trial court decisions in merchant cash advance cases and binding precedent established by Champion Auto Sales, the judge not only shot the usury argument down but also awarded the recovery of attorney fees to the MCA company for having to defend themselves against something so frivolous.

“The Court determines, in light of the history of these litigated matters and known binding precedent, Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defending the Motion [..],” he ordered.

The full decision can be viewed here.

Last modified: April 20, 2019

Category: Legal Briefs

Home Legal Briefs › Usury Argument in Merchant Cash Advance Suit Backfires Horribly

    Meridian Leads


    Velocity Capital Group



    Paz Funding Source

    Avanza Capital

    In Advance

    Highland Hill Capital

    Hunter Caroline


    ROK Financial

    Splash Advance


    South End Capital

    Balboa Capital

    Green Note Capital

    Accord Business Funding

    Total Merchant Resources

    Fresh Funding

    Global Funding Experts

    Vox Funding

    Legend Funding


    Fox Business Funding

    Titan Asset Management

    Merchant Financing Leads