Zerbinos v. Tucker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zerbinos v. Tucker

156 A.D.2d 957, 550 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16113

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 156 A.D.2d 957 (Zerbinos v. Tucker) 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

Zerbinos v. Tucker, 156 A.D.2d 957, 550 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16113 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal unanimously dismissed with costs. Memorandum: Appellant’s purchase offer for the property was never accepted; consequently, he lacks standing to appeal the Family Court’s order directing its sale by public [958]*958auction (CPLR 5511). Were there standing, we would find no abuse of discretion in the Family Court’s directive to sell the sequestered property by public auction pursuant to RPAPL 231. We further find that Family Court correctly granted Receiver Bergan’s motion to intervene (see, CPLR 1012 [a] [3]; Family Ct Act § 165). (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Family Court, McLaughlin, J. — authorization for private sale.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Lawton, JJ.

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

Appeal unanimously dismissed with costs. Memorandum: Appellant’s purchase offer for the property was never accepted; consequently, he lacks standing to appeal the Family Court’s order directing its sale by public [958]*958auction (CPLR 5511). Were there standing, we would find no abuse of discretion in the Family Court’s directive to sell the sequestered property by public auction pursuant to RPAPL 231. We further find that Family Court correctly granted Receiver Bergan’s motion to intervene (see, CPLR 1012 [a] [3]; Family Ct Act § 165). (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Family Court, McLaughlin, J. — authorization for private sale.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 A.D.2d 957, 550 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zerbinos-v-tucker-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack