Republic Bank of Savings v. Stein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Republic Bank of Savings v. Stein

220 A.D.2d 654, 632 N.Y.S.2d 980, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10652

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

DecidedOctober 23, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 220 A.D.2d 654 (Republic Bank of Savings v. Stein) 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

Republic Bank of Savings v. Stein, 220 A.D.2d 654, 632 N.Y.S.2d 980, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10652 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to foreclose a mortgage on real property, the defendants Harry J. Stein and Harriet Stein appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated April 5, 1994, which, upon granting the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and directs the sale of the subject property at public auction.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the ap-. pellants failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). The Supreme Court therefore properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment (see, CPLR 3212 [b]). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Santucci and Joy, 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 on real property, the defendants Harry J. Stein and Harriet Stein appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated April 5, 1994, which, upon granting the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and directs the sale of the subject property at public auction.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the ap-. pellants failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). The Supreme Court therefore properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment (see, CPLR 3212 [b]). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 A.D.2d 654, 632 N.Y.S.2d 980, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/republic-bank-of-savings-v-stein-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack