McRae v. Hummel

250 A.D. 873, 295 N.Y.S. 202, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9509
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 26, 1937
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 250 A.D. 873 (McRae v. Hummel) 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
McRae v. Hummel, 250 A.D. 873, 295 N.Y.S. 202, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9509 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Opinion

Order denying plaintiff’s motion to strike out the answer and for summary judgment under rules 113 and 114 of the Rules of Civil Practice reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with ten dollars costs. The bond in suit was given simultaneously with the execution of a mortgage as a first hen on certain real property. Defendant defaulted in the payment of taxes and a sale and foreclosure of the tax hen was had, resulting in the extinguishment of the hen of the first mortgage. The property was bought in by the holder of the first mortgage, she being free so to do (Sautter v. Frick, 229 App. Div. 345; [874]*874affd., 256 N. Y. 535) without impairing or lessening her rights under the bond upon which the defendant was obligated to her and the lien of which was extinguished by the sale based on a default of the defendant which gave rise to the existence of a lien prior to that of the first mortgage. Her rights then were measured by the doctrine of Weisel v. Hagdahl Realty Co., Inc. (241 App. Div. 314). The doctrine of Klein v. Kramer (246 App. Div. 760), upon which defendant relies, was retracted. (Realty Associates Securities Corporation v. Hoblin, 247 App. Div. 904; Klein v. Kramer, 248 id. 617.) Any other view would imperil the validity of section 1083-b of the Civil Practice Act. Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Davis, Johnston and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Bank of New York v. Midland Avenue Development Co.
248 A.D.2d 342 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Gilbert v. Dean
113 A.D.2d 235 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
250 A.D. 873, 295 N.Y.S. 202, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcrae-v-hummel-nyappdiv-1937.