Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi Trust Co. v. Rolls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi Trust Co. v. Rolls

248 A.D.2d 1022, 670 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3128

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

DecidedMarch 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D.2d 1022 (Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi Trust Co. v. Rolls) 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

Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi Trust Co. v. Rolls, 248 A.D.2d 1022, 670 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3128 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition seeking relief pursuant to CPLR 5227. The fundamental issue is whether, as petitioner contends, there is a debt owing from respondents to the judgment creditor or whether, as respondents contend, no such debt exists and the judgment debtor is also indebted to [1023]*1023respondents. We conclude that respondents’ position is correct and that petitioner has misapplied article 10 of the Debtor and Creditor Law. Even if petitioner’s attempts to set aside as a fraudulent conveyance the obligation of the judgment debtor to render legal services on behalf of respondents’ law partnership were successful, no debt owing from respondents to the judgment debtor would result that could be paid over to petitioner. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Debtor and Creditor Law.)

Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Callahan, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition seeking relief pursuant to CPLR 5227. The fundamental issue is whether, as petitioner contends, there is a debt owing from respondents to the judgment creditor or whether, as respondents contend, no such debt exists and the judgment debtor is also indebted to [1023]*1023respondents. We conclude that respondents’ position is correct and that petitioner has misapplied article 10 of the Debtor and Creditor Law. Even if petitioner’s attempts to set aside as a fraudulent conveyance the obligation of the judgment debtor to render legal services on behalf of respondents’ law partnership were successful, no debt owing from respondents to the judgment debtor would result that could be paid over to petitioner. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Debtor and Creditor Law.)

Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Callahan, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 1022, 670 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-tokyo-mitsubishi-trust-co-v-rolls-nyappdiv-1998.