Febbraro v. Febbraro

70 A.D.2d 584, 416 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11989
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 7, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 70 A.D.2d 584 (Febbraro v. Febbraro) 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
Febbraro v. Febbraro, 70 A.D.2d 584, 416 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11989 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

— In an action to foreclose a mortgage and for the appointment of a receiver, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme court, Nassau County, entered January 4, 1979, which denied her motions for summary judgment and the appointment of a temporary receiver and granted the respondent’s cross motion for summary judgment. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, plaintiff’s motions are granted, respondent’s cross motion is denied and the action is remitted to Special Term for the appointment of a receiver and entry of an appropriate judgment. The affidavits and exhibits submitted by the parties establish that the mortgage provided that the mortgagor was to pay his indebtedness of $8,500 in monthly installments of $125 per month on the first day of each month and that if he defaulted in the payment of any installment for 15 days the mortgagee could elect to declare the whole of the said sum owed due. The record further establishes that the mortgagor defaulted, that the [585]*585plaintiff mortgagee did make such election in timely fashion and that the mortgagor’s tender of the July payment was not made until after plaintiff had made her election and took overt action to notify the mortgagor that she had done so. The mortgagee is under no duty to prove the necessity for the appointment of a receiver since the language of the mortgage and of subdivision 10 of section 254 of the Real Property Law clearly entitle her to the appointment of a receiver of the rental income of the mortgaged property. O’Connor, J. P., Rabin, Shapiro and Mangano, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Maspeth Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. McGown
77 A.D.3d 889 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Maspeth Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. McGowan
77 A.D.3d 890 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Naar v. I.J. Litwak & Co.
260 A.D.2d 613 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Citibank v. Nyland Cf8) Ltd.
839 F.2d 93 (Second Circuit, 1988)
Citibank, N.A. v. Nyland (CF8) Ltd.
839 F.2d 93 (Second Circuit, 1988)
Kestenberg v. Platinum Properties Corp.
112 A.D.2d 268 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Manufacturers & Traders Trust Co. v. Cottrell
80 A.D.2d 744 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 A.D.2d 584, 416 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/febbraro-v-febbraro-nyappdiv-1979.