In re the Estate of Oster

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Oster

258 A.D. 930, 16 N.Y.S.2d 612, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7615

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

DecidedDecember 27, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 258 A.D. 930 (In re the Estate of Oster) 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

In re the Estate of Oster, 258 A.D. 930, 16 N.Y.S.2d 612, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree so far as appealed from affirmed, with costs. Appeal from the decision dismissed,. Memorandum: When the decedent Oster conveyed the property to Mabel D:. Harper and she assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage, Mabel D. Harper became) the principal debtor and decedent became surety. As surety the decedent had the' right of subrogation. Upon payment of the deficiency judgment he was entitled1, to be subrogated to the rights of the claimants and to an assignment of the judgment against Mabel D. Harper. Claimants had knowledge that Mabel D. Harper' had assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage. When claimants released Mabel D. Harper from the judgment and satisfied the judgment as against her they destroyed Osier’s right of subrogation and he thereupon became discharged from, liability to claimants. (Wagoner v. Brady, 221 App. Div. 405; Germania Life Ins.. Co. v. Casey, 98 id. 88; Calvo v. Davies, 73 N. Y. 211; Paine v. Jones, 76 id. 274; Murray v. Marshall, 94 id. 611.) All concur. (The portion of the decree appealed', from dismisses a claim against an estate to recover the amount of a deficiency" judgment in a foreclosure action.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham,, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

Decree so far as appealed from affirmed, with costs. Appeal from the decision dismissed,. Memorandum: When the decedent Oster conveyed the property to Mabel D:. Harper and she assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage, Mabel D. Harper became) the principal debtor and decedent became surety. As surety the decedent had the' right of subrogation. Upon payment of the deficiency judgment he was entitled1, to be subrogated to the rights of the claimants and to an assignment of the judgment against Mabel D. Harper. Claimants had knowledge that Mabel D. Harper' had assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage. When claimants released Mabel D. Harper from the judgment and satisfied the judgment as against her they destroyed Osier’s right of subrogation and he thereupon became discharged from, liability to claimants. (Wagoner v. Brady, 221 App. Div. 405; Germania Life Ins.. Co. v. Casey, 98 id. 88; Calvo v. Davies, 73 N. Y. 211; Paine v. Jones, 76 id. 274; Murray v. Marshall, 94 id. 611.) All concur. (The portion of the decree appealed', from dismisses a claim against an estate to recover the amount of a deficiency" judgment in a foreclosure action.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham,, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 930, 16 N.Y.S.2d 612, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-oster-nyappdiv-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack