Federal Land Bank v. Handschuh

125 Misc. 2d 686, 480 N.Y.S.2d 294, 1984 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3468
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 26, 1984
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 125 Misc. 2d 686 (Federal Land Bank v. Handschuh) 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
Federal Land Bank v. Handschuh, 125 Misc. 2d 686, 480 N.Y.S.2d 294, 1984 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3468 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1984).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

George G. Inglehart, J.

In this mortgage foreclosure action, by ex parte motion September 10, 1984, plaintiff seeks to have a sum for “reasonable attorney’s fees” added to the foreclosure judgment.

No provision was made in the mortgage instrument for attorney’s fees. The mortgage note, however, included “then the unpaid principal balance and interest shall become due and payable immediately, at the option of the holder thereof, together with reasonable attorney’s collection fees.”

In due course the mortgage itself was recorded in the clerk’s office, but the mortgage note was not so recorded.

There is no question here but that plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees. The issue is whether such fees are properly included in the judgment of foreclosure. It is plaintiff’s contention that the provisions of the note are incorporated by reference into the mortgage instrument and the fees should therefore be added to the mortgage indebtedness.

However, to do so would give the attorney’s fees a priority status, ahead even of other judgment creditors, without notice. There should be clear and specific language in the mortgage instrument, which, when recorded, would give notice of the additional charges.

[687]*687Warren’s Weed, New York Real Property (vol 2A, 1984 Cum Supp, Foreclosure, § 12.04, pp 16-17), states it thus: “In the absence of an express agreement for payment of attorney’s fees as part of the mortgage lien, such fees may not be awarded * * * in a foreclosure proceeding as part of the amount due on the mortgage.”

Motion denied.

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

Related

Watertown Savings Bank v. Delaney
23 Misc. 3d 838 (New York Supreme Court, 2009)
Sibley Mortgage Corp. v. Sobotica
155 Misc. 2d 616 (New York Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
125 Misc. 2d 686, 480 N.Y.S.2d 294, 1984 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-land-bank-v-handschuh-nysupct-1984.