Hut v. Fraser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hut v. Fraser

12 A.D.2d 641, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6502

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

DecidedDecember 14, 1960

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 12 A.D.2d 641 (Hut v. Fraser) 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

Hut v. Fraser, 12 A.D.2d 641, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6502 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Mabel Fraser, an incompetent person, by her committee, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 8, 1960, which denies her motion for an order vacating the. summons and complaint, vacating the default judgment entered in the action, and nullifying subsequent conveyances and liens on the premises. The defendant was adjudicated an incompetent and a committee for her person and property was appointed after the entry of judgment in the foreclosure action and after the sale of the property to a bona fide purchaser for a valuable and fair consideration. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements (see, e.g., Goldberg v. McCord, 251 N. Y. 28). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, 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 defendant Mabel Fraser, an incompetent person, by her committee, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 8, 1960, which denies her motion for an order vacating the. summons and complaint, vacating the default judgment entered in the action, and nullifying subsequent conveyances and liens on the premises. The defendant was adjudicated an incompetent and a committee for her person and property was appointed after the entry of judgment in the foreclosure action and after the sale of the property to a bona fide purchaser for a valuable and fair consideration. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements (see, e.g., Goldberg v. McCord, 251 N. Y. 28). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.2d 641, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hut-v-fraser-nyappdiv-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack