Daly v. Bacz Holding Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Daly v. Bacz Holding Corp.

168 Misc. 493, 5 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1653

DecidedApril 29, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 168 Misc. 493 (Daly v. Bacz Holding Corp.) 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

Daly v. Bacz Holding Corp., 168 Misc. 493, 5 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1653 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Hallinan, J.

Motion for an order directing the plaintiff to pay the referee the sum of fifty dollars. The referee was appointed in a judgment of foreclosure and sale, and pursuant thereto he proceeded to advertise and did advertise the mortgaged premises directed to be sold, the sale to take place on March 25,1938. The day before the sale he received a telephone call from the attorney for the plaintiff requesting him not to sell the mortgaged premises inasmuch as the defendant had made the default good. He did not, therefore, appear at the time and place set for the sale. Subsequently he requested payment of his fees from the said attorney, but it was refused — hence this motion.

The moving party cites the cases of Prudential Ins. Co. v. Hogan (235 App. Div. 196); Interboro Associates, Inc., v. Zeitler (248 id. 737), and Railroad Cooperative Building & Loan Association v. Cautero (240 id. 318) in support of this application.

I am of opinion, however, that none of these cases has any application, for in each of them there was a bid upon which a computation of the referee’s fee could be made. In the present case there has been no sale and there is no bid. Consequently the referee is not entitled to any compensation.

Motion denied. Submit order.

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

Hallinan, J.

Motion for an order directing the plaintiff to pay the referee the sum of fifty dollars. The referee was appointed in a judgment of foreclosure and sale, and pursuant thereto he proceeded to advertise and did advertise the mortgaged premises directed to be sold, the sale to take place on March 25,1938. The day before the sale he received a telephone call from the attorney for the plaintiff requesting him not to sell the mortgaged premises inasmuch as the defendant had made the default good. He did not, therefore, appear at the time and place set for the sale. Subsequently he requested payment of his fees from the said attorney, but it was refused — hence this motion.

The moving party cites the cases of Prudential Ins. Co. v. Hogan (235 App. Div. 196); Interboro Associates, Inc., v. Zeitler (248 id. 737), and Railroad Cooperative Building & Loan Association v. Cautero (240 id. 318) in support of this application.

I am of opinion, however, that none of these cases has any application, for in each of them there was a bid upon which a computation of the referee’s fee could be made. In the present case there has been no sale and there is no bid. Consequently the referee is not entitled to any compensation.

Motion denied. Submit order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 Misc. 493, 5 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daly-v-bacz-holding-corp-nysupct-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack