Feldman v. Six Eleven Realty Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Feldman v. Six Eleven Realty Co.

125 Misc. 821, 211 N.Y.S. 585, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 978

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJanuary 26, 1925

StatusPublished

This text of 125 Misc. 821 (Feldman v. Six Eleven Realty Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Feldman v. Six Eleven Realty Co., 125 Misc. 821, 211 N.Y.S. 585, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 978 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, with thirty dollars costs to the appellants, and judgment directed for the plaintiffs for the amount demanded in the complaint, with interest, and with appropriate costs in the court below.

Upon the pleadings and proof in the case it does not appear whether plaintiffs paid the tax lien before or after the conveyance by [822]*822them to third parties. If before, there can be no doubt of their right to recover. (Geiszler v. De Graaf, 166 N. Y. 339.) We also hold that if the lien was paid after that conveyance, a recovery may be had.

While it may be that after a conveyance by the covenantee of a covenant against incumbrances, his cause of action for a breach of the covenant is lost to him and resides in his grantee, yet where he pays the incumbrance after a conveyance, in which he has covenanted against incumbrances, he is subrogated to the rights of his grantee and becomes the equitable assignee of the cause of action of his grantee, as if his grantee had paid the incumbrance. (Dunlop v. James, 174 N. Y. 411; Pittsburgh-Westmoreland Coal Co. v. Kerr, 220 id. 137.)

Present: Cropsey, Lazansky and MacCrate, JJ.

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

Per Curiam:

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, with thirty dollars costs to the appellants, and judgment directed for the plaintiffs for the amount demanded in the complaint, with interest, and with appropriate costs in the court below.

Upon the pleadings and proof in the case it does not appear whether plaintiffs paid the tax lien before or after the conveyance by [822]*822them to third parties. If before, there can be no doubt of their right to recover. (Geiszler v. De Graaf, 166 N. Y. 339.) We also hold that if the lien was paid after that conveyance, a recovery may be had.

While it may be that after a conveyance by the covenantee of a covenant against incumbrances, his cause of action for a breach of the covenant is lost to him and resides in his grantee, yet where he pays the incumbrance after a conveyance, in which he has covenanted against incumbrances, he is subrogated to the rights of his grantee and becomes the equitable assignee of the cause of action of his grantee, as if his grantee had paid the incumbrance. (Dunlop v. James, 174 N. Y. 411; Pittsburgh-Westmoreland Coal Co. v. Kerr, 220 id. 137.)

Present: Cropsey, Lazansky and MacCrate, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 Misc. 821, 211 N.Y.S. 585, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 978, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feldman-v-six-eleven-realty-co-nyappterm-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack