Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. v. Ronkon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. v. Ronkon

289 A.D.2d 438, 735 N.Y.S.2d 424, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12932

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

DecidedDecember 24, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 289 A.D.2d 438 (Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. v. Ronkon) 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

Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. v. Ronkon, 289 A.D.2d 438, 735 N.Y.S.2d 424, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12932 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Domestic Loan & Investment Bank appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), dated January 24, 2001, which denied its motion to set aside a foreclosure sale.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant’s motion to set aside the foreclosure sale was properly denied. The purchaser of the property at the foreclosure sale was an indispensable party to the motion to set aside the sale and was not served with the motion papers (see, Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v New York Fin. & Mtge. Co., 222 AD2d 647; Vanderbilt Realty Corp. v Gordon, 134 AD2d 586).

In light of our determination, the appellant’s remaining contention need not be addressed. Florio, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Domestic Loan & Investment Bank appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), dated January 24, 2001, which denied its motion to set aside a foreclosure sale.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant’s motion to set aside the foreclosure sale was properly denied. The purchaser of the property at the foreclosure sale was an indispensable party to the motion to set aside the sale and was not served with the motion papers (see, Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v New York Fin. & Mtge. Co., 222 AD2d 647; Vanderbilt Realty Corp. v Gordon, 134 AD2d 586).

In light of our determination, the appellant’s remaining contention need not be addressed. Florio, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 438, 735 N.Y.S.2d 424, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12932, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/citicorp-mortgage-inc-v-ronkon-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack