Standard Tile Co. v. O'Mara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Standard Tile Co. v. O'Mara

256 A.D. 1096, 11 N.Y.S.2d 603, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6259

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

DecidedApril 17, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 256 A.D. 1096 (Standard Tile Co. v. O'Mara) 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

Standard Tile Co. v. O'Mara, 256 A.D. 1096, 11 N.Y.S.2d 603, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6259 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion for the vacatur of an order directing the payment to the Standard Tile Company, Inc., of moneys deposited to discharge a mechanic’s lien and requiring restitution thereof to Malba Park, Inc., which deposited the money, reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs. The order directing the payment of the moneys deposited to the lienor was made without warrant of law. The provision in section 20 of the Lien Law authorizing the payment of such moneys to a lienor contemplates the making of such payment after the lienor has established the validity of its lien. Here the lienor did not estabHsh that fact and the order it obtained was without warrant in law. When the depositor of the money moved for the vacatur the Hen had lapsed because it had not been extended by order and no action to enforce it had been begun within one year after the notice of Hen was filed. Lazansky, P. J., CarsweU, Adel, Taylor and Close. JJ., concur.

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

Order denying motion for the vacatur of an order directing the payment to the Standard Tile Company, Inc., of moneys deposited to discharge a mechanic’s lien and requiring restitution thereof to Malba Park, Inc., which deposited the money, reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs. The order directing the payment of the moneys deposited to the lienor was made without warrant of law. The provision in section 20 of the Lien Law authorizing the payment of such moneys to a lienor contemplates the making of such payment after the lienor has established the validity of its lien. Here the lienor did not estabHsh that fact and the order it obtained was without warrant in law. When the depositor of the money moved for the vacatur the Hen had lapsed because it had not been extended by order and no action to enforce it had been begun within one year after the notice of Hen was filed. Lazansky, P. J., CarsweU, Adel, Taylor and Close. JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D. 1096, 11 N.Y.S.2d 603, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/standard-tile-co-v-omara-nyappdiv-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack