Lawsuits by merchant cash advance (MCA) companies can be beaten in court. Weinberg Legal PLLC has continually identified new ways to defeat MCA companies.
Decisions won by Weinberg Legal on the defense of criminal usury:
May 15, 2018, LG Funding vs United Senior Properties (motion to dismiss criminal usury defense denied)
Mar. 11, 2020,  Appellate Court affirms.
Nov. 5, 2021, Union Funding Source, Inc. (agreement is found to be a loan subject to criminal usury defense)
Jan. 21, 2022, Ein Cap, Inc. (agreement is subject to criminal usury defense because bankruptcy is a default and reconciliation not mandatory)
Jan. 25, 2022 Ace Funding Source (triable issue of whether agreement is a criminally usurious loan.
Feb. 1, 2022, Unique Funding Solutions LLC (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
Mar. 2, 2022, Chrome Capital LLC (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
Apr. 13, 2022, Fox Capital Group, Inc. v God's Love (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
Jun. 8, 2022, Slate Advance, (Appellate Division 2nd Dept.) (default judgment vacated when the agreement might be a criminally usurious loan)
Jul. 7, 2022, Union Funding Source, Inc. (acknowledging 5 ways that lender was insulated from a reconciliation, causing the agreement to be a criminally usurious loan).
Sep. 21, 2022, Wynwood Capital Group (where the agreement states that an email request for a reconciliation is only valid if the funder sends a reply email there is no automatic right to a reconciliation; summary judgment denied to plaintiff because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
Nov. 14, 2022, Merchant Business Solutions (provisions in agreement that bankruptcy was a default subject it to a criminal usury defense)
Feb. 22, 2023, World Global Fund (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
Mar. 8, 2023, IMS Fund LLC (provision that merchant may request a reconciliation does not obligate funder to provide one)
May 9, 2023, Emerald Group Fund dba Vitalcap (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
Jan. 12, 2024, Kash Capital (fixed daily payment could not be stopped despite reconciliation request; making agreement finite, and reconciliation would never reduce payment below criminal usury rate)
Feb. 27, 2024, 22 Capital (fixed daily payment could not be stopped despite reconciliation request; making agreement finite, and reconciliation would never reduce payment below criminal usury rate)
Mar. 15, 2024, Avanza Group (plaintiff not allowed to bombard defendant with its discovery demands and its motion for judgment because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
Mar. 20, 2024, Emerald Group Fund dba Vitalcap (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because reconciliation was a sham and agreement had appearance of criminally usurious loan)
Apr. 22, 2024, Webfund Instafunders (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)
​Jan. 6, 2025, Phantom Advance (agreement was a criminally usurious loan and action dismissed; bankruptcy was a default and reconciliation was not a right but only a courtesy)
Feb. 10, 2025, Royal Business Group (Supervising Judge for Supreme Civil Court, Monroe County, holds that reconciliation is not genuine because funder can demand reasonable verification, subjecting agreement to criminal usury defense; plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied)
Apr. 8, 2025, Vox Funding (plaintiff's summary judgment motion denied because agreement could be a criminally usurious loan)

Weinberg Legal PLLC files detailed answers, listing all available defenses plus the math supporting the criminal usury defense. Below are samples in date order (newest last), each answer quoting the latest court opinions:
Fundfi
Vox Funding
Worldwide Capital
Velocity Capital
Redstone Advance
Eminent Funding
E Advance Services
Itria Ventures
3Point Capital Group
Kalamata Capital Group
Main Street Merchant Services
Fincoast Capital
Kash Advance
Simply Funding
Swift Funding
Epic Advance
Pearl Beta Funding
Grid Market LLC
CFG Merchant Solutions
Wynwood Capital Group
Spartan Business Solutions
Cashable LLC
​​
Lenders Not Allowed to Sue in New York: If the plaintiff was formed under the laws of a state other than New York, and you are also outside of New York, the court may not have any subject matter jurisdiction and must dismiss the case. The plaintiff's only choice is to then sue you in your home state. Weinberg Legal PLLC has succeeded in getting cases dismissed on this ground: 
Fox Capital Group
Harper Advance
Pearl Beta Funding
Parkview Advance
Speedy Funding
Iruka Capital
Liberty Funding Solutions
Mantis Funding
The appellate court in Kapitus Servicing provided an easy test of whether this defense will succeed. Did the MCA company wire its funding from a New York bank? Check your bank statement showing the MCA company's wire of the funding. That wire confirmation will often provide the location or routing number of the MCA company's bank in order to determine if it was in New York. The Kapitus opinion was followed in a case against Bizfund defended by Weinberg Legal PLLC.
​​
Has the lender continued to debit payments after the lawsuit? If so, Weinberg Legal has gotten the lawsuit dismissed on that ground (Vox Funding) or summary judgment denied (AJ Equity Group LLC).
​
Bank Accounts Located Outside New York State are Immune: New York follows the "separate entity rule" under which a bank account located outside of New York cannot be frozen or garnished in order to satisfy a New York judgment. This is true even if the bank has a New York branch or office. Almost every MCA lender violates this law by freezing and garnishing the bank account even though they know that your account is maintained out of state. Courts then force them to refund the money. Weinberg Legal brings such proceedings to get a refund. MCA Rehab LLC: restraint vacated. Cloudfund LLC restraint vacated.
If a proceeding is brought against your bank to turn over the funds to the lender, it is important for you to get that proceeding denied because a restraining notice is valid for only one year. After the year expires, your bank must release the money to you unless there was a levy or they won the proceeding for a turnover.
​
WARNING -- Besides going to court, the MCA lender can send a UCC lien notice to any customer or credit processor you have, freezing any payments due to you. New York's highest court has just endorsed the UCC lien.
​
Settlement Companies. Even before you get sued, settlement companies solicit you, usually promising to settle your loan once you put in escrow with them 40% of the amount owed. The only judge in New York to have thoroughly reviewed these companies found that they do nothing but take your money. Weinberg Legal has sued these companies for clients who couldn't get their money back from them.
​
TESTIMONIALS
​
Thank you Amos!! You are the man!! Will be my guy moving forward with the rest of these I have.
RJ,
Greenville NC
​
Thank you. Words can not express the relief I feel right now. I have been running like a fugitive.  I really don't know what to do next. Thank you for all your work and your time. I don't know if I owe you anything right now but if I do please give time to get on my feet again.  Thank you again.
CR,
McKinney, Texas
​
​
​
​
FAQ
​
Q: Why should we retain you instead of the other dozen attorneys who contacted us?
A: ​Please see my track record, above, of winning these cases. No other attorney has this. Because I'm able to win these cases, I do more than just waste time until a settlement gets rammed down your throat.
​
Q: Is it worth it for us to hire you?
A: As I warned above, the MCA lender can send a UCC lien notice to any known customer or credit processor of yours. If this is going to force you to settle with them, it may not be prudent  for you to hire me.
​
Q: Can you guaranty a win?
A: I can't guaranty any result, but if I am not sure that we can beat the MCA company in court, I am not taking your case.
​
Jack Amos Cook, Admitted New York State and United States District Court, 1978
jack@WeinberglegalPLLC.com
(516) 829-3900
(631) JUSTICE
(561) 728-8800
49 Somerset Drive South
Great Neck NY 11020​