Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank v. Fairdeal Holding Corp.

238 A.D. 850

This text of 238 A.D. 850 (Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank v. Fairdeal Holding Corp.) 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
Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank v. Fairdeal Holding Corp., 238 A.D. 850 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Opinion

Order denying motions to vacate ex parte order appointing a receiver reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that plaintiff failed to comply with the provisions of subdivision 2 of section 150 of the General Corporation Law. It does not appear from the complaint or the motion papers that the plaintiff ever demanded payment of any installment of principal or interest or taxes, or that thirty days had elapsed since any of these items became due, or that the income of the property was specifically mortgaged, or that the property is insufficient to pay the amounts claimed to be due the plaintiff, all of which must appear to entitle the plaintiff to the appointment of a receiver of the rents of the property of a corporate mortgagor. (See New York Title & Mortgage Co. v. Polk Arms, Inc., 237 App. Div. 852, decided by this court December 23,1932.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Seudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

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

Related

New York Title & Mortgage Co. v. Polk Arms, Inc.
237 A.D. 852 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
238 A.D. 850, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emigrant-industrial-savings-bank-v-fairdeal-holding-corp-nyappdiv-1933.