Adler v. Atlas Brick Corporation

New York Court of Appeals

Adler v. Atlas Brick Corporation

27 N.E.2d 434, 283 N.Y. 64, 1940 N.Y. LEXIS 939

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 26, 1940

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 27 N.E.2d 434 (Adler v. Atlas Brick Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adler v. Atlas Brick Corporation, 27 N.E.2d 434, 283 N.Y. 64, 1940 N.Y. LEXIS 939 (N.Y. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

As between the parties, at least in the absence of intervening equities, whether or not a mortgage of real property also covers personal property, is a question of intent and that is a question of fact. In East River Savings Bank v. 671 Prospect Ave. Holding Corp. (280 N. Y. 342) we held that, since a question of fact was presented, summary judgment should not have been granted. Here there has been a trial on the merits and a finding that the parties intended that the mortgages cover personal property.

The order of the Appellate Division affirming the order of the Supreme Court of Columbia county dated May 2, 1938, and entered May 4,1938, should be affirmed, with costs.

Lehman, Ch. J., ■ Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Sears, Lewis and Conway, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, etc.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

As between the parties, at least in the absence of intervening equities, whether or not a mortgage of real property also covers personal property, is a question of intent and that is a question of fact. In East River Savings Bank v. 671 Prospect Ave. Holding Corp. (280 N. Y. 342) we held that, since a question of fact was presented, summary judgment should not have been granted. Here there has been a trial on the merits and a finding that the parties intended that the mortgages cover personal property.

The order of the Appellate Division affirming the order of the Supreme Court of Columbia county dated May 2, 1938, and entered May 4,1938, should be affirmed, with costs.

Lehman, Ch. J., ■ Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Sears, Lewis and Conway, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 N.E.2d 434, 283 N.Y. 64, 1940 N.Y. LEXIS 939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adler-v-atlas-brick-corporation-ny-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack