Kadison v. Long Island Savings Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kadison v. Long Island Savings Bank

225 A.D.2d 523, 639 N.Y.2d 93, 639 N.Y.S.2d 93, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1903

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

DecidedMarch 4, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 523 (Kadison v. Long Island Savings Bank) 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

Kadison v. Long Island Savings Bank, 225 A.D.2d 523, 639 N.Y.2d 93, 639 N.Y.S.2d 93, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

The allegations of the complaint and the proposed amended complaint constituted a collateral attack on the plan of conversion which was approved by the Office of Thrift Supervision (hereinafter OTS). The United States Courts of Appeals have exclusive jurisdiction to review an OTS order approving a plan of conversion (see, 12 USC § 1464 [i] [2] [A], [B]; § 1467a [j]). As a result, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and properly denied the plaintiff’s cross motion for leave to serve and file an amended complaint (see, 12 USC § 1464 [i] [2] [A], [B]; 12 USC § 1467a [j]; see also, Ordower v Office of Thrift Supervision, 999 F2d 1183, 1188; Craft v Florida Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 786 F2d 1546, 1553; Harr v Prudential Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 557 F2d 751, cert denied 434 US 1033; Dougherty v Carver Fed. Sav. Bank, US Dist Ct., SD NY, Jan. 3, 1996, Motley, J.). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

The allegations of the complaint and the proposed amended complaint constituted a collateral attack on the plan of conversion which was approved by the Office of Thrift Supervision (hereinafter OTS). The United States Courts of Appeals have exclusive jurisdiction to review an OTS order approving a plan of conversion (see, 12 USC § 1464 [i] [2] [A], [B]; § 1467a [j]). As a result, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and properly denied the plaintiff’s cross motion for leave to serve and file an amended complaint (see, 12 USC § 1464 [i] [2] [A], [B]; 12 USC § 1467a [j]; see also, Ordower v Office of Thrift Supervision, 999 F2d 1183, 1188; Craft v Florida Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 786 F2d 1546, 1553; Harr v Prudential Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 557 F2d 751, cert denied 434 US 1033; Dougherty v Carver Fed. Sav. Bank, US Dist Ct., SD NY, Jan. 3, 1996, Motley, J.). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 523, 639 N.Y.2d 93, 639 N.Y.S.2d 93, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kadison-v-long-island-savings-bank-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack