First National Bank of Boston v. Schumacher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

First National Bank of Boston v. Schumacher

231 A.D.2d 603, 647 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9491

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

DecidedSeptember 23, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 231 A.D.2d 603 (First National Bank of Boston v. Schumacher) 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

First National Bank of Boston v. Schumacher, 231 A.D.2d 603, 647 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9491 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated July 19, 1995, as, upon granting reargument, adhered to its prior determination denying the plaintiff’s application for a deficiency judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, it has not demonstrated its entitlement to a deficiency judgment. The decretal provision of the judgment of foreclosure and sale was insufficient to adjudicate liability for a deficiency (see, The Pines at Setauket v Retirement Mgt. Group, 223 AD2d 539). Thompson, J. P., Altman, Hart and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated July 19, 1995, as, upon granting reargument, adhered to its prior determination denying the plaintiff’s application for a deficiency judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, it has not demonstrated its entitlement to a deficiency judgment. The decretal provision of the judgment of foreclosure and sale was insufficient to adjudicate liability for a deficiency (see, The Pines at Setauket v Retirement Mgt. Group, 223 AD2d 539). Thompson, J. P., Altman, Hart and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

231 A.D.2d 603, 647 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-national-bank-of-boston-v-schumacher-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack