King v. WNY Holding Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

King v. WNY Holding Corp.

38 A.D.2d 685, 327 N.Y.S.2d 258

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

DecidedDecember 9, 1971

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 38 A.D.2d 685 (King v. WNY Holding Corp.) 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

King v. WNY Holding Corp., 38 A.D.2d 685, 327 N.Y.S.2d 258 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Order insofar as it grants partial summary judgment to respondent unanimously reversed and otherwise order affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Special Term incorrectly granted partial summary judgment to respondents, declaring the deed to be a mortgage. Whether a deed, absolute on its face, is a mortgage depends upon the intent of the parties (Matter of Newcourt Realty Holding Corp. v. Gabel, 28 A D 2d 704; Real Property Law, § 320) and, as such, presents a question of fact requiring a trial. (Appeal from order of Brie Special Term granting partial summary judgment in action to declare deed void.) Present—Marsh, J. P., Witmer, Gabrielli, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

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

Order insofar as it grants partial summary judgment to respondent unanimously reversed and otherwise order affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Special Term incorrectly granted partial summary judgment to respondents, declaring the deed to be a mortgage. Whether a deed, absolute on its face, is a mortgage depends upon the intent of the parties (Matter of Newcourt Realty Holding Corp. v. Gabel, 28 A D 2d 704; Real Property Law, § 320) and, as such, presents a question of fact requiring a trial. (Appeal from order of Brie Special Term granting partial summary judgment in action to declare deed void.) Present—Marsh, J. P., Witmer, Gabrielli, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

Monroe R. Meyerson, Sidney Milgrim and Central Rigging and Contracting Corporation v. William J. Werner, William C. Sherr, Robert Sylvor, Bandler & Kass, S.D. Associates, Eastern Development and Investment Corp., Eastern Development& Investment Corp.-Maine, Larch-Tree Co., Inc., Wjc Realty Co., Inc., Mid-City Management Col, Inc., General Eastern Building Corp., Tex/miss Apartment Associates and Lawton Associates, and Walter Cook, Monroe R. Meyerson, Sidney Milgrim, and Central Rigging and Contracting Corporation v. William J. Werner, William C. Sherr, Robert Sylvor, Bandler & Kass, S.D. Associates, Eastern Development & Investment Corp.-Maine, Larch-Tree Co., Inc., Wjc Realty Co., Inc., Mid-City Management Co., Inc., General Eastern Building Corp., Tex/miss Apartment Associates and Lawton Associates, and Walter Cook and Eastern Development and Investment Corp.

683 F.2d 723 (Second Circuit, 1982)

Meyerson v. Werner

683 F.2d 723 (Second Circuit, 1982)

Bielawski v. Bazar

47 A.D.2d 435 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 685, 327 N.Y.S.2d 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-wny-holding-corp-nyappdiv-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack