Forman v. Malloy

163 A.D. 919, 148 N.Y.S. 1115

This text of 163 A.D. 919 (Forman v. Malloy) 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
Forman v. Malloy, 163 A.D. 919, 148 N.Y.S. 1115 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Opinion

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on account of the failure to prove the judgment roll in the Birdsall v. Baird foreclosure proceedings, as a foundation for the referee’s deed. As to plaintiff and third persons, the recitals in a deed by the referee in foreclosure cannot establish the judicial proceedings, so that without the judgment roll the referee’s deed was unsupported, and did not pass the Baird title. (Townshend v. Wesson, 4 Duer, 343; Platt v. Picton, 3 Robt. 64; 3 Phillips Ev. [ed. of 1868] *614.) Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 A.D. 919, 148 N.Y.S. 1115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forman-v-malloy-nyappdiv-1914.