Eumi Co. v. 105 East Second Street Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Eumi Co. v. 105 East Second Street Associates

251 A.D.2d 164, 673 N.Y.S.2d 906, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7296

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

DecidedJune 18, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D.2d 164 (Eumi Co. v. 105 East Second Street Associates) 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

Eumi Co. v. 105 East Second Street Associates, 251 A.D.2d 164, 673 N.Y.S.2d 906, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7296 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment of foreclosure and sale, Supreme Court, New York County (William McCooe, J.), entered December 23, 1997, confirming the Referee’s report dated July 23, 1997, and ordering the subject premises sold at public auction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff established a prima facie case of ownership and nonpayment by introduction of the consolidated mortgage and [165]*165assignment into evidence, and oral testimony of the principal amount due (see, Isaacson v Karpe, 84 AD2d 868; Keahon v Spinelli, 135 AD2d 503). It was not error to apply the 24% annual interest rate upon default provided in the mortgage documents (see, Stein v American Mtge. Banking, 216 AD2d 458; compare, Banque Nationale v 1567 Broadway Ownership Assocs., 248 AD2d 154). We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Rubin, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment of foreclosure and sale, Supreme Court, New York County (William McCooe, J.), entered December 23, 1997, confirming the Referee’s report dated July 23, 1997, and ordering the subject premises sold at public auction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff established a prima facie case of ownership and nonpayment by introduction of the consolidated mortgage and [165]*165assignment into evidence, and oral testimony of the principal amount due (see, Isaacson v Karpe, 84 AD2d 868; Keahon v Spinelli, 135 AD2d 503). It was not error to apply the 24% annual interest rate upon default provided in the mortgage documents (see, Stein v American Mtge. Banking, 216 AD2d 458; compare, Banque Nationale v 1567 Broadway Ownership Assocs., 248 AD2d 154). We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Rubin, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 164, 673 N.Y.S.2d 906, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eumi-co-v-105-east-second-street-associates-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack