Manhattan Savings Bank v. Farrell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Manhattan Savings Bank v. Farrell

268 A.D. 981, 51 N.Y.S.2d 939

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 22, 1944·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Taking into consideration the evidence of all pertinent factors as adduced before the official referee, we find that the fair and reasonable market value of the premises as of the date of sale was $60,000. The Special Term accordingly was warranted in denying the motion for a deficiency judgment. The order so far as appealed from, should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.

Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur.

Order so far as appealed from, unanimously affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Per Curiam.

Taking into consideration the evidence of all pertinent factors as adduced before the official referee, we find that the fair and reasonable market value of the premises as of the date of sale was $60,000. The Special Term accordingly was warranted in denying the motion for a deficiency judgment. The order so far as appealed from, should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.

Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur.

Order so far as appealed from, unanimously affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.

Manhattan Savings Bank v. Farrell, 268 A.D. 981, 51 N.Y.S.2d 939 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

268 A.D. 981 (Manhattan Savings Bank v. Farrell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related