Goldstein v. Gold
This text of 485 N.E.2d 239 (Goldstein v. Gold) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice (now Judge) Vito J. Titone at the Appellate Division (106 AD2d 100), only insofar as the opinion holds that the intervening defendant, who purchased the property encumbered by the mortgage, is bound by a notice of pendency filed prior to the recording of his deed and the satisfaction of mortgage.
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander. Taking no part: Judge Titone.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
485 N.E.2d 239, 66 N.Y.2d 624, 495 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldstein-v-gold-ny-1985.