Blazevich v. Pearson
Defendant and appellant Paul Blazevich (Paul), representing himself on appeal, contends a $50,000 note he drafted in 1993 in favor of his aunt and uncle, Carollyn Blazevich (Carollyn) and Edward Blazevich (Edward), was usurious because he only received $48,000 of the $50,000 they transferred to him, and the $2,000 difference, when combined with the interest at the "maximum rate allowed by law" provided under the note, exceeded the statutory maximum. Paul thus seeks reversal of the portion of the judgment denying his usury claim and requests the matter be remanded for a new trial on that issue.
We conclude Paul's usury claim is barred by res judicata, and that, in any event, the note was not usurious. Court thus affirm the judgment.
Comments on Blazevich v. Pearson