On August 10, 2023, Justice Ruchelsman of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Shakur v. Fullerton, 2023 NY Slip Op. 32795(U), holding that when the interest rate on a note is described differently in words and numerals, the words control, explaining:
On May 28, 2019 the defendants executed a promissory note in the amount of $200,000. The typewritten words of the note state the interest rate was zero, however, the numbers state the interest rate was 20%.
. . .
Uniform Commercial Code §3-118Cc) states that regarding every instrument words control figures except that if the words are ambiguous figures control. In this case the words of the note concerning the interest rate differs from the numerical amount of the interest rate. The words state a zero percent interest rate while the numerical figures state a rate of 20%. There is no ambiguity in this regard, rather, there is a discrepancy. The plaintiff has failed to present sufficient evidence that the court should not decide the discrepancy pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code or that the discrepancy can be attributed to a scrivener’s error. Therefore, based on the foregoing the motion seeking summary judgement is granted. The amount owed shall be the $190,000.
(Internal citations omitted).