Associated Financial Services, Inc. v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Associated Financial Services, Inc. v. Davis

183 A.D.2d 686, 583 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6534

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 4, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 183 A.D.2d 686 (Associated Financial Services, Inc. v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Associated Financial Services, Inc. v. Davis, 183 A.D.2d 686, 583 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6534 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action, inter alia, to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Eileen M. Davis appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.), entered April 5, 1990, which (1) granted the motion of the defendant Margaret F. Jirak to appoint a Referee in a surplus money proceeding, and (2) in effect, denied the cross motion of the appellant to be awarded the surplus moneys as holder of the equity of redemption.

[687]*687Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The failure to move to appoint a Referee in the surplus money proceeding within the time period prescribed by RPAPL 1361 (2) is a mere irregularity which, in the absence of prejudice to any substantial right of a party, may be disregarded (see, CPLR 2001, 2004; Fidelity Bond & Mtge. Co. v Lucas, 135 AD2d 778; Sibley Realty Corp. v Schwab, 11 Misc 2d 997). Thus, the court properly exercised its discretion in disregarding the statutory time limitation (see, CPLR 2001) and granting the motion to appoint a Referee in the surplus money proceeding (see, CPLR 2004). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action, inter alia, to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Eileen M. Davis appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.), entered April 5, 1990, which (1) granted the motion of the defendant Margaret F. Jirak to appoint a Referee in a surplus money proceeding, and (2) in effect, denied the cross motion of the appellant to be awarded the surplus moneys as holder of the equity of redemption.

[687]*687Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The failure to move to appoint a Referee in the surplus money proceeding within the time period prescribed by RPAPL 1361 (2) is a mere irregularity which, in the absence of prejudice to any substantial right of a party, may be disregarded (see, CPLR 2001, 2004; Fidelity Bond & Mtge. Co. v Lucas, 135 AD2d 778; Sibley Realty Corp. v Schwab, 11 Misc 2d 997). Thus, the court properly exercised its discretion in disregarding the statutory time limitation (see, CPLR 2001) and granting the motion to appoint a Referee in the surplus money proceeding (see, CPLR 2004). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 A.D.2d 686, 583 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/associated-financial-services-inc-v-davis-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack