Johnson v. Stein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Johnson v. Stein

7 A.D.2d 856, 182 N.Y.S.2d 346, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10349

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 7 A.D.2d 856 (Johnson v. Stein) 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

Johnson v. Stein, 7 A.D.2d 856, 182 N.Y.S.2d 346, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10349 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to compel the determination of claims to certain real property (Real Property Law, art. 15) the appeal is from so much of a judgment entered after trial before a Special Referee as awarded the possession of the real property to the respondent and directed the appellant to deliver to the defendant certain tax certificates relating to the property to be marked surrendered and redeemed. Judgment insofar as appealed from affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur; Murphy, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment insofar as appealed from and to dismiss the complaint, with the following memorandum: When respondent on November 19, 1953 purported to redeem the property from the tax sale of November 21, 1950, she had no interest therein. She had no status, therefore, to effectuate such redemption within the limitation of section 49 of the Suffolk County Tax Act (L. 1920, ch. 311, as amd. by L. 1929, ch. 152) as either the owner, a person interested in or one having a lien upon the property (People ex rel. Marsh v. Campbell, 143 N. Y. 335). Two days after the invalid redemption, appellant was entitled to a deed. He demanded such deed in January, 1954. He is in legal effect the owner of the property. In consequence, the subsequent attempt by respondent in October, 1954 to redeem the property from the tax sale of November 8, 1951 cannot be upheld. Again, the respondent was neither owner, pterson interested in nor one having a lien upon the property. [10 Misc 2d 91.]

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

In an action to compel the determination of claims to certain real property (Real Property Law, art. 15) the appeal is from so much of a judgment entered after trial before a Special Referee as awarded the possession of the real property to the respondent and directed the appellant to deliver to the defendant certain tax certificates relating to the property to be marked surrendered and redeemed. Judgment insofar as appealed from affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur; Murphy, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment insofar as appealed from and to dismiss the complaint, with the following memorandum: When respondent on November 19, 1953 purported to redeem the property from the tax sale of November 21, 1950, she had no interest therein. She had no status, therefore, to effectuate such redemption within the limitation of section 49 of the Suffolk County Tax Act (L. 1920, ch. 311, as amd. by L. 1929, ch. 152) as either the owner, a person interested in or one having a lien upon the property (People ex rel. Marsh v. Campbell, 143 N. Y. 335). Two days after the invalid redemption, appellant was entitled to a deed. He demanded such deed in January, 1954. He is in legal effect the owner of the property. In consequence, the subsequent attempt by respondent in October, 1954 to redeem the property from the tax sale of November 8, 1951 cannot be upheld. Again, the respondent was neither owner, pterson interested in nor one having a lien upon the property. [10 Misc 2d 91.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.2d 856, 182 N.Y.S.2d 346, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-stein-nyappdiv-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack