Meritor Credit Corp. v. Eisenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Meritor Credit Corp. v. Eisenberg

204 A.D.2d 284, 614 N.Y.S.2d 156, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4572

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

DecidedMay 2, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 204 A.D.2d 284 (Meritor Credit Corp. v. Eisenberg) 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

Meritor Credit Corp. v. Eisenberg, 204 A.D.2d 284, 614 N.Y.S.2d 156, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4572 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants Robert and Carol Eisenberg appeal from (1) an order of Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.) dated May 13, 1992, which, inter alia, granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and denied their cross motion to dismiss the complaint, and (2) an order of the same court dated June 24, 1992, which, inter alia, appointed a Referee to compute the amount due the plaintiff.

Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the Supreme Court that Business Corporation Law § 1312 (a) does not require dismissal of this action commenced by a New York corporation which succeeded to the interests of an unauthorized foreign corporation (see, United Arab Shipping Co. v Al-Hashim, 176 AD2d 569; Beer v Myers & Co., 159 AD2d 943, Tri-Terminal Corp. v CITC Indus., 78 AD2d 609). The case of Pergament Home Ctrs. v Net Realty Holding Trust (171 AD2d 736), which involved an action commenced by an unauthorized foreign corporation doing business in New York, is distinguishable from the case at bar. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants Robert and Carol Eisenberg appeal from (1) an order of Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.) dated May 13, 1992, which, inter alia, granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and denied their cross motion to dismiss the complaint, and (2) an order of the same court dated June 24, 1992, which, inter alia, appointed a Referee to compute the amount due the plaintiff.

Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the Supreme Court that Business Corporation Law § 1312 (a) does not require dismissal of this action commenced by a New York corporation which succeeded to the interests of an unauthorized foreign corporation (see, United Arab Shipping Co. v Al-Hashim, 176 AD2d 569; Beer v Myers & Co., 159 AD2d 943, Tri-Terminal Corp. v CITC Indus., 78 AD2d 609). The case of Pergament Home Ctrs. v Net Realty Holding Trust (171 AD2d 736), which involved an action commenced by an unauthorized foreign corporation doing business in New York, is distinguishable from the case at bar. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.D.2d 284, 614 N.Y.S.2d 156, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meritor-credit-corp-v-eisenberg-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack