Gaglione v. Mahoney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gaglione v. Mahoney

306 A.D.2d 279, 760 N.Y.S.2d 350, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6236

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

DecidedJune 2, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 306 A.D.2d 279 (Gaglione v. Mahoney) 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

Gaglione v. Mahoney, 306 A.D.2d 279, 760 N.Y.S.2d 350, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6236 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5239 to determine adverse claims to property, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kit-son, J.), entered April 10, 2002, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. The purpose of CPLR 5203 (b) is to protect a purchaser, creditor, or mortgagee in good faith, or “such persons who would not otherwise have notice of pending levy and Sheriff’s sale” (Kazmeroff v Ehlinger, 43 Misc 2d 942, 944 [1964]; see Roma Roofing Co. v Marcotrigiano, 156 AD2d 638 [1989]). Here, it is clear that the petitioner was on notice , of the judgment lien filed by the respondent Sam’s Bargain Center, Inc., doing business as Sam’s B.C. Nurseries (hereinafter Sam’s), and that she docketed her own judgment before its expiration. Thus, she was not entitled to first priority against Sam’s with respect to the proceeds of the sale of the subject property.

The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5239 to determine adverse claims to property, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kit-son, J.), entered April 10, 2002, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. The purpose of CPLR 5203 (b) is to protect a purchaser, creditor, or mortgagee in good faith, or “such persons who would not otherwise have notice of pending levy and Sheriff’s sale” (Kazmeroff v Ehlinger, 43 Misc 2d 942, 944 [1964]; see Roma Roofing Co. v Marcotrigiano, 156 AD2d 638 [1989]). Here, it is clear that the petitioner was on notice , of the judgment lien filed by the respondent Sam’s Bargain Center, Inc., doing business as Sam’s B.C. Nurseries (hereinafter Sam’s), and that she docketed her own judgment before its expiration. Thus, she was not entitled to first priority against Sam’s with respect to the proceeds of the sale of the subject property.

The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 A.D.2d 279, 760 N.Y.S.2d 350, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaglione-v-mahoney-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack