Sourian v. Saleh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sourian v. Saleh

50 A.D.2d 756, 376 N.Y.S.2d 166, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11549

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

DecidedDecember 11, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 A.D.2d 756 (Sourian v. Saleh) 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

Sourian v. Saleh, 50 A.D.2d 756, 376 N.Y.S.2d 166, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11549 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered August 21, 1975, canceling a notice of lis pendens, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal to respondents. There is no claim by plaintiffs of an interest in the adjoining property but, rather, an effort to prevent defendants from committing a wrongful act against them. "A notice of lis pendens cannot be filed where the party who has filed it claims no right, title or interest in or to the real estate against which it is filed, and where the suit concerns simply some encroachment or wrong perpetrated” (Braunston v Anchorage Woods, 10 NY2d 302, 305). Concur — Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Capozzoli, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered August 21, 1975, canceling a notice of lis pendens, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal to respondents. There is no claim by plaintiffs of an interest in the adjoining property but, rather, an effort to prevent defendants from committing a wrongful act against them. "A notice of lis pendens cannot be filed where the party who has filed it claims no right, title or interest in or to the real estate against which it is filed, and where the suit concerns simply some encroachment or wrong perpetrated” (Braunston v Anchorage Woods, 10 NY2d 302, 305). Concur — Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Capozzoli, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 756, 376 N.Y.S.2d 166, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sourian-v-saleh-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack