Mutual Trust Co. v. Polymero

54 Misc. 379, 105 N.Y.S. 1024
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 54 Misc. 379 (Mutual Trust Co. v. Polymero) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mutual Trust Co. v. Polymero, 54 Misc. 379, 105 N.Y.S. 1024 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1907).

Opinion

Guy, J.

This is an action of ejectment, brought by the plaintiff to recover possession of an irregular, interior parcel of land, about fifteen feet square, situated between Forty-first and Forty-second streets, Madison and Fourth avenues, in the borough of Manhattan. Plaintiff claims title as successor to Benjamin Knower, executor and trustee of John F. Gray, deceased, who, it is alleged, derived his title by purchase of certain property under foreclosure and by conveyances executed from Edward Livermore and the heirs of Jane H. Livermore and William T. Livermore.

[380]*380The common source of title was Sarah Burr, the owner of a large piece of property adjacent to and including the premises in dispute, and who, in October, 1866, conveyed to Ann Livermore, wife of Edward Livermore, a parcel twenty-five feet by one hundred feet, including the disputed premises. In November, 1866, Ann Livermore and husband conveyed a part of the said parcel, twenty feet six inches by fifty-two feet, to Jane Livermore (not including the disputed premises) and a mortgage covering said plot twenty feet six inches by fifty-two feet was, in February, 1874, executed by Jane Livermore and husband to Benjamin F. Gray. Foreclosure proceedings were subsequently instituted in 1879 by the said Gray, as a result of which said premises were conveyed to Gray by the referee under foreclosure. The description contained in the complaint in the foreclosure proceedings and the referee’s deed covered only twenty feet six inches by fifty-two feet and did not include the disputed premises.

Meanwhile, by a series of conveyances, Edward Livermore had become vested with title to the disputed premises as well as to property immediately contiguous thereto, fronting on Forty-second street, and, by deed from Jane Livermore and husband, dated the 25th day of February, 1874, had become the owner of the premises fronting on Forty-first street, subject to said mortgage.

Edward Livermore, in or about the year 1876, erected a structure known as the Devonshire Hotel on the property fronting on Forty-second street and, at the same time, erected on land in the rear thereof an extension which connected the Hotel Devonshire with the property fronting on Forty-first street.

In 1878, Edward Livermore and Ann, his wife, executed and delivered a deed to Wright E. Post which, though in form a deed, was subsequently adjudicated to be in effect a mortgage. The description in said deed did not include the disputed premises. In 1880, a deed was executed by Edward Livermore and Ann Livermore to Post, conveying the same premises under the same description as contained in the deed of 1878.

[381]*381It is contended by the defendants that it was intended by the said deed to convey all property then owned by Edward Livermore between Forty-first and Forty-second streets, Fourth and Madison avenues, that was covered by the walls from Forty-second street to the mortgage line of the Forty-first street property, the north line; but, by an error in description, the deed omitted to include the disputed premises.

In 1879, subsequently to the conveyance to Post in 1878, which was in effect a mortgage, Edward Livermore leased to one Robinson “ the premises known as the Hotel Devonshire * * * and also the house known as Ho. 41 East Forty-first Street, in the rear and connecting with the hotel aforesaid, for five years from May 1, 1879, at the yearly rental of $5,000,” said lease containing the following provision : “And it is further mutually agreed that this lease is taken by the said Robinson with knowledge that a mortgage on said premises on 41st Street is in process of foreclosure, and in case said premises are sold under said foreclosure proceedings during said term, so that this lease shall, as to said premises on 41st Street, be at an end by reason of said foreclosure, then and in that case it is agreed that the above rent reserved to be paid by the said Robinson, shall be abated to the extent of $1,500 a year from and after the time said premises on 41st Street, shall, by operation of said foreclosure and sale, be excluded from operation of this lease, and said Robinson shall take his chances of renting the same from the purchaser.”

Foreclosure proceedings were begun in 1879 and, on May 12, 1879, one Benjamin Knower was appointed receiver of the rents of the mortgaged premises and thereafter, from February 1, 1880, until May 17, 1882, collected and received the same from the tenant at the rate of $1,500 per year.

The rent for the Hotel Devonshire and the contiguous property, other than that covered by the mortgage and known as No. 41 East Forty-first street, was, during the pendency of the lease to Robinson and of subsequent leases made by the said Post to one Hasey and one Cauchois, [382]*382collected by the defendant Post, said Edward Livermore having, on May 20, 1879, assigned to Post all his right, title and interest in the lease to Bobinson.

In 1881, judgment was entered against Edward Liver-more and Ann Livermore, in favor of Benjamin F. Gray, for $12,053.12.

By deed dated May 4, 1882, by George Putnam Smith, referee in the foreclosure suit, to John F. Gray, Gray became vested with title to the premises covered by the said mortgage, namely, the premises twenty feet six inches by fifty-two feet fronting on Forty-first street.

Gray subsequently died, and letters testamentary were issued to Benjamin Knower.

In January, 1884, an action was begun by said Knower, as executor, against the defendant Post and others, in which the complaint set up the above-mentioned judgment and alleged that the deeds made to Post in 1878 and 1880 by Edward and Ann Livermore were in fraud of creditors, and prayed judgment that they might be so adjudged and a sale of the property ordered, etc.

On June 24, 1885, judgment was duly entered in said action, adjudging, among other things, that both the above-mentioned deeds were executed for a good, valid and sufficient consideration, and that, by deed of August 27, 1880, title to the premises therein described vested absolutely in the defendant Post; and the complaint was dismissed with costs.

On February 21, 1884, Post leased to one Hasey the premises No. 30 East Forty-second street, etc., “ with the appurtenances for five years, at the yearly rental of $5,500.

On June 3, 1884, Knower, as executor, leased to Hasey the premises known as No. 41 East Forty-first street, for five years, from the 1st day of May, 1884, at the yearly rent of $1,500, the same amount that the rental was to be abated in the Robinson lease, in the event of the foreclosure of the said premises.

Hasey remained as tenant of both properties down to 1899.

[383]*383On January 24, 1898, the defendant Post leased to one Cauchois, for the term of ten years, the premises at No. 30 East 42d Street, etc., with the appurtenances.”

Between April 19 and 28, 1899, the defendant Post caused to he built a brick wall, which constitutes the rear wall of the Hotel Devonshire, across the northerly line of the premises conveyed to Gray by the referee in foreclosure, until it joins the westerly wall, closing all communication between the Hotel Devonshire and No. 41 East Forty-first street.

This wall is upon the disputed premises.

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

Related

Udelavitz v. Ketchen
190 P. 1029 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 Misc. 379, 105 N.Y.S. 1024, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mutual-trust-co-v-polymero-nysupct-1907.