Stickel

Stickel v. Harris

Good Law
196 Cal. App. 3d 575·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 2352·242 Cal. Rptr. 88
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 24, 1987No. A035933California7,382 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Poché, J.

The issue presented is whether a loan bearing a 30 percent annual rate of interest obtained by a licensed real estate broker on behalf of himself and certain fellow partners and joint venturers is exempt from the interest limitations of the usury law.

Background

In December of 1980 Nancy Stickel was approached by Robert Butticci, a licensed real estate broker, with a short-term investment proposal. Butticci told Stickel that he and his partners Joseph Atencio and Joseph Harris wanted her to invest in a joint venture project involving the purchase of real estate on Corbett Avenue upon which condominiums would be constructed. 1 As an inducement Butticci offered to pay first 25 percent and then 30 percent interest on any amount loaned, assuring Stickel that neither rate of return was usurious. Stickel eventually provided Butticci and Atencio with $74,000 for the project. The rate of interest was set at 30 percent for the duration of the loan, which was to be repaid by April 15, 1981. The loan was secured by deeds of trust on the property.

*580 Butticci and Atencio made one interest payment to Stickel, in February of 1981. That same month they advised Stickel that they…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.