United States v. Walker Park Realty, Inc.

383 F.2d 732, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 5007
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedSeptember 28, 1967
Docket48, Docket 31385
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 383 F.2d 732 (United States v. Walker Park Realty, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Walker Park Realty, Inc., 383 F.2d 732, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 5007 (2d Cir. 1967).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We affirm in open court the judgment of the District Court for the Eastern District of New York awarding a deficiency judgment against appellant in this mortgage foreclosure action brought by the United States. The question raised is whether a deficiency judgment may be entered after the foreclosure sale where the original judgment of foreclosure and sale directed the master to report the amount of any deficiency but did not expressly provide for the subsequent entry of a deficiency judgment.

Since federal law applies in an action by the United States to foreclose a mortgage insured by and assigned to the FHA, e. g., United States v. View Crest Garden Apts., Inc., 268 F.2d 380 (9 Cir. 1959), the New York cases cited by appellant are not controlling. In the present case the complaint requested a deficiency judgment and appellant, who had personally assumed the mortgage, was personally served. The judgment of foreclosure and sale, entered upon appellant’s default, awarded the plaintiff judgment in the sum of $1,011,854.11, the total amount due on the mortgage. The judgment also ordered the sale of the mortgaged premises, appointed a master to carry out the sale, and directed the master to report the amount of any deficiency if the proceeds of the sale were insufficient to satisfy the judgment.

In these circumstances, we think it was sufficiently clear that the original judgment was a personal judgment against appellant for the full amount due on the mortgage and that it contemplated the further entry of a deficiency judgment if a deficiency were found to exist after the foreclosure sale.

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

Related

United States v. Stewart
361 F. Supp. 1161 (D. Nebraska, 1973)
United States v. McIntyre Veneer, Inc.
343 F. Supp. 1095 (M.D. Louisiana, 1972)
United States v. Mackenzie
322 F. Supp. 1058 (D. Nevada, 1971)
United States v. Stadium Apartments, Inc.
425 F.2d 358 (Ninth Circuit, 1970)
United States v. Merrick Sponsor Corp.
421 F.2d 1076 (Second Circuit, 1970)
United States v. Merrick Sponsor Corp.
294 F. Supp. 1048 (E.D. New York, 1968)
United States v. Wells
403 F.2d 596 (Fifth Circuit, 1968)
United States v. Munroe Towers, Inc.
286 F. Supp. 92 (D. New Jersey, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
383 F.2d 732, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 5007, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-walker-park-realty-inc-ca2-1967.