Citytrust v. Slattery

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Citytrust v. Slattery

245 A.D.2d 187, 666 N.Y.S.2d 169, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13132

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

DecidedDecember 18, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D.2d 187 (Citytrust v. Slattery) 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

Citytrust v. Slattery, 245 A.D.2d 187, 666 N.Y.S.2d 169, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13132 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered September 11, 1996, which, inter alia, denied defendants-appellants’ motion to vacate a default judgment entered in favor of respondent as second mortgagee for a deficiency judgment against them as guarantors, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The IAS Court properly declined to vacate the deficiency judgment obtained on default. There was no jurisdictional defect since the seventh decretal paragraph of the judgment of foreclosure and sale provided for recovery of the mortgage debt against appellants and service of the motion seeking the deficiency judgment was properly made on appellants’ counsel in the foreclosure action (see, RPAPL 1371 [2]). We note the initial [188]*188motion for the deficiency judgment was timely (see, RPAPL 1371 [2]; General Construction Law § 25-a).

We have considered appellants’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered September 11, 1996, which, inter alia, denied defendants-appellants’ motion to vacate a default judgment entered in favor of respondent as second mortgagee for a deficiency judgment against them as guarantors, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The IAS Court properly declined to vacate the deficiency judgment obtained on default. There was no jurisdictional defect since the seventh decretal paragraph of the judgment of foreclosure and sale provided for recovery of the mortgage debt against appellants and service of the motion seeking the deficiency judgment was properly made on appellants’ counsel in the foreclosure action (see, RPAPL 1371 [2]). We note the initial [188]*188motion for the deficiency judgment was timely (see, RPAPL 1371 [2]; General Construction Law § 25-a).

We have considered appellants’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 187, 666 N.Y.S.2d 169, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/citytrust-v-slattery-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack