Greenberg v. Schwartz

273 A.D. 814, 76 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4761
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 19, 1948·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

In an action to remove a cloud on title, defendant appeals from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The fact that plaintiff executed the mortgage which he now seeks to remove as a cloud on title does not deprive him of the right to maintain the action. (Stokes v. Houghton, 16 App. Div. 381.) Although this action was commenced eleven years after the execution and delivery of the mortgage, it is not barred by the Statute of Limitations. Where the action is brought by an owner in possession, the right is a continuing one which may be asserted at any time during the existence of the cloud. A different rule applies where the action is by an owner not in possession. (Ford v. Glendenin, 215 N. Y. 10.) Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.

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

Greenberg v. Schwartz, 273 A.D. 814, 76 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4761 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

273 A.D. 814 (Greenberg v. Schwartz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bellino v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
209 F. Supp. 3d 601 (S.D. New York, 2016)
Knox v. Countrywide Bank
4 F. Supp. 3d 499 (E.D. New York, 2014)
Barberan v. Nationpoint
706 F. Supp. 2d 408 (S.D. New York, 2010)
Union & New Haven Trust Co. v. People
26 Misc. 2d 831 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
Gifford v. Whittemore
4 A.D.2d 379 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1957)