City Real Estate Co. v. King

58 Misc. 69, 110 N.Y.S. 231
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 15, 1908
StatusPublished

This text of 58 Misc. 69 (City Real Estate Co. v. King) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City Real Estate Co. v. King, 58 Misc. 69, 110 N.Y.S. 231 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1908).

Opinion

O’Gorman, J.

In my opinion the complaint contains two causes of action, one to recover on the bond, and the other, if the execution on the personal judgment be returned unsatisfied, to foreclose the mortgage. This is the relief sought, and the prayer for judgment may be properly considered in determining the nature of the action set forth in the complaint. Swart v. Boughton, 35 Hun, 284. The rule that when equity has obtained jurisdiction it may adapt the relief to the exigencies of the case does not apply to an action of foreclosure which is purely statutory. Dudley v. Congregation, 138 N. Y. 458. The two causes of action, one in law and one in equity, are improperly joined, and the demurrer must be sustained, with costs, with the usual leave.

Demurrer sustained with costs, with usual leave.

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

Related

Dudley v. Congregation of the Third Order of St. Francis
34 N.E. 281 (New York Court of Appeals, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
58 Misc. 69, 110 N.Y.S. 231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-real-estate-co-v-king-nysupct-1908.