Columbia Federal Savings Bank v. Carvin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Columbia Federal Savings Bank v. Carvin

225 A.D.2d 471, 639 N.Y.2d 802, 639 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3194

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

DecidedMarch 26, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 225 A.D.2d 471 (Columbia Federal Savings Bank v. Carvin) 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

Columbia Federal Savings Bank v. Carvin, 225 A.D.2d 471, 639 N.Y.2d 802, 639 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3194 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

The record is devoid of any factual allegations, much less evidence, that could serve to defeat plaintiff’s right to foreclose on its mortgage. Appellants’ claim that they were defrauded or otherwise improperly induced to relinquish ownership of the subject property involves a dispute only between them and their purchaser, not plaintiff. That a mortgagee does not investigate the circumstances surrounding a mortgagor’s acquisition of a property is hardly a basis for finding that the mortgagee aided and abetted the mortgagor’s fraud in acquiring the property. We have considered appellants’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

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

The record is devoid of any factual allegations, much less evidence, that could serve to defeat plaintiff’s right to foreclose on its mortgage. Appellants’ claim that they were defrauded or otherwise improperly induced to relinquish ownership of the subject property involves a dispute only between them and their purchaser, not plaintiff. That a mortgagee does not investigate the circumstances surrounding a mortgagor’s acquisition of a property is hardly a basis for finding that the mortgagee aided and abetted the mortgagor’s fraud in acquiring the property. We have considered appellants’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 471, 639 N.Y.2d 802, 639 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/columbia-federal-savings-bank-v-carvin-nyappdiv-1996.