J. Henry Small Realty Co. v. Strauss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

J. Henry Small Realty Co. v. Strauss

162 A.D. 658, 147 N.Y.S. 478, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5993

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

DecidedMay 8, 1914

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 162 A.D. 658 (J. Henry Small Realty Co. v. Strauss) 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

J. Henry Small Realty Co. v. Strauss, 162 A.D. 658, 147 N.Y.S. 478, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5993 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This is an appeal from an order of the Special Term discharging and canceling of record a lis pendens. The action [659]*659is to enforce specific performance of a contract to erect certain specified and prescribed buildings on land sold by the plaintiff to the defendant corporation, which holds the land for the use and benefit of the other defendants, to impress a lien thereon for the unpaid purchase price, and for a decree that the defendant execute and deliver a mortgage to plaintiff, provided for in the said contract. We think that the action may be described as one to recover a judgment affecting the title to or the possession, use or enjoyment of real property within the purview of section 1670 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Bachman v. Wagner, 40 N. Y. St. Repr. 757. And see Lawrence v. Saratoga Lake R. Co., 36 Hun, 467.) In determination of the right to file a Us pendens, the court will not seek to see whether the action is well brought. (Jones v. Armenia Insurance Co., 136 App. Div. 453; Brox v. Riker, 56 id. 388, 391; Lindheim & Co. v. Central Nat. Realty & Construction Co., 111 id. 275.)

The order is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Per Curiam:

This is an appeal from an order of the Special Term discharging and canceling of record a lis pendens. The action [659]*659is to enforce specific performance of a contract to erect certain specified and prescribed buildings on land sold by the plaintiff to the defendant corporation, which holds the land for the use and benefit of the other defendants, to impress a lien thereon for the unpaid purchase price, and for a decree that the defendant execute and deliver a mortgage to plaintiff, provided for in the said contract. We think that the action may be described as one to recover a judgment affecting the title to or the possession, use or enjoyment of real property within the purview of section 1670 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Bachman v. Wagner, 40 N. Y. St. Repr. 757. And see Lawrence v. Saratoga Lake R. Co., 36 Hun, 467.) In determination of the right to file a Us pendens, the court will not seek to see whether the action is well brought. (Jones v. Armenia Insurance Co., 136 App. Div. 453; Brox v. Riker, 56 id. 388, 391; Lindheim & Co. v. Central Nat. Realty & Construction Co., 111 id. 275.)

The order is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 A.D. 658, 147 N.Y.S. 478, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-henry-small-realty-co-v-strauss-nyappdiv-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack