Rhodes v. Town of Deerpark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rhodes v. Town of Deerpark

50 A.D.2d 566, 375 N.Y.S.2d 15, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12319

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

DecidedNovember 3, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 566 (Rhodes v. Town of Deerpark) 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

Rhodes v. Town of Deerpark, 50 A.D.2d 566, 375 N.Y.S.2d 15, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12319 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action inter alia to reform a conveyance and to bar defendants from asserting any claims to certain premises, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated February 11, 1974, in favor of plaintiff, after a nonjury trial. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff established by a fair preponderance of evidence that she and her husband, defendant Richard K. Rhodes, intended that he should convey to her the entire tract in question and not just the small parcel labeled "Otisville Dump” on the survey. Despite some ambiguity, his 1965 deed to her, reasonably construed, gave effect to their intention, and the trial court properly so found. The defendant Town of Deerpark took its deed with notice of the first deed and of plaintiff’s claim. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Margett, Christ and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action inter alia to reform a conveyance and to bar defendants from asserting any claims to certain premises, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated February 11, 1974, in favor of plaintiff, after a nonjury trial. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff established by a fair preponderance of evidence that she and her husband, defendant Richard K. Rhodes, intended that he should convey to her the entire tract in question and not just the small parcel labeled "Otisville Dump” on the survey. Despite some ambiguity, his 1965 deed to her, reasonably construed, gave effect to their intention, and the trial court properly so found. The defendant Town of Deerpark took its deed with notice of the first deed and of plaintiff’s claim. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Margett, Christ and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 566, 375 N.Y.S.2d 15, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rhodes-v-town-of-deerpark-nyappdiv-1975.