Sportsmen's Park, Inc. v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'n

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sportsmen's Park, Inc. v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'n

99 A.D.2d 582, 471 N.Y.S.2d 253, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16819

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Sportsmen's Park, Inc. v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'n. Read the opinion of the Court — 97 A.D.2d 893 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 16, 1984·Published

Opinion

— Motion for reargument denied, without costs. The decision of this court dated November 17,1983 does not require that a mortgage foreclosure action be commenced prior to an insurer making payment to a mortgagee to the extent of the mortgagee’s interest in the property. Motion for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted, without costs. Pursuant to CPLR 5713, this court certifies that the following question of law, decisive of the correctness of its determination, has arisen, which in its opinion ought to be reviewed by the Court of Appeals: “Was so much of Special Term’s order as denied the motion by defendant New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association for partial summary judgment on its third affirmative defense, correct as a matter of law?” Kane, J. P., Main, Mikoll and Levine, JJ., concur.

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

— Motion for reargument denied, without costs. The decision of this court dated November 17,1983 does not require that a mortgage foreclosure action be commenced prior to an insurer making payment to a mortgagee to the extent of the mortgagee’s interest in the property. Motion for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted, without costs. Pursuant to CPLR 5713, this court certifies that the following question of law, decisive of the correctness of its determination, has arisen, which in its opinion ought to be reviewed by the Court of Appeals: “Was so much of Special Term’s order as denied the motion by defendant New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association for partial summary judgment on its third affirmative defense, correct as a matter of law?” Kane, J. P., Main, Mikoll and Levine, JJ., concur.

Sportsmen's Park, Inc. v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'n, 99 A.D.2d 582, 471 N.Y.S.2d 253, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16819 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

99 A.D.2d 582 (Sportsmen's Park, Inc. v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.