This text of New York § 1197 (Claims for surplus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
§ 1197. Claims for surplus. 1. Any person who had any right, title,\ninterest, claim, lien or equity of redemption in or upon a parcel\nimmediately prior to the issuance of the judgment of foreclosure may\nfile a claim with the court having jurisdiction for a share of any\nsurplus resulting from the sale of such property. Such claims shall be\nadministered and adjudicated, and such surplus shall be distributed, in\nthe same manner as in an action to foreclose a mortgage pursuant to\narticle thirteen of the real property actions and proceedings law,\nsubject to the provisions of this section.\n 2.
(a)Where the property was sold by a public sale, the amount paid\nfor the property shall be accepted as the full value of the property. No\nparty may maintain a claim for surplus or any other
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
§ 1197. Claims for surplus. 1. Any person who had any right, title,\ninterest, claim, lien or equity of redemption in or upon a parcel\nimmediately prior to the issuance of the judgment of foreclosure may\nfile a claim with the court having jurisdiction for a share of any\nsurplus resulting from the sale of such property. Such claims shall be\nadministered and adjudicated, and such surplus shall be distributed, in\nthe same manner as in an action to foreclose a mortgage pursuant to\narticle thirteen of the real property actions and proceedings law,\nsubject to the provisions of this section.\n 2. (a) Where the property was sold by a public sale, the amount paid\nfor the property shall be accepted as the full value of the property. No\nparty may maintain a claim for surplus or any other claim or action\nagainst the tax district on the basis that the amount paid for the\nproperty did not fairly represent the property's value.\n (b) Where the property was sold by other than a public sale, a\nclaimant may make a motion, upon notice to the enforcing officer, for\nthe surplus to be recalculated on the basis that the property's full\nvalue on the date of the sale was substantially higher than the value\nused to measure the surplus pursuant to subparagraph (ii) of paragraph\n(a) of subdivision one of section eleven hundred ninety-six of this\ntitle. If the court or its referee finds that a preponderance of the\nevidence supports the claimant's position, the court may direct the\nenforcing officer to recalculate the surplus based upon the property's\nvalue as determined by the court or referee. The court may further\ndirect the enforcing officer to pay the difference into court to be\ndistributed as required by this section.\n 3. Where the court has appointed a referee to preside over the\nproceedings pursuant to subdivision two of section thirteen hundred\nsixty-one of the real property actions and proceedings law, it shall not\nbe necessary for such referee to make a report of such proceedings; nor\nshall it be necessary for the court to confirm by order or otherwise\nsuch proceedings.\n 4. In the case of residential property, if at the time of the\nconfirmation of the report of sale, no former homeowner has filed a\nclaim for surplus, and there are surplus proceeds that remain to be\ndistributed, the proceeding shall remain open for at least three years\nfrom the confirmation of the report of sale, or for such longer period\nas the court may direct. If a former homeowner should file a claim for\nsurplus during such period, the court shall proceed as if it had been\ntimely filed.\n 5. At the conclusion of such proceedings, any surplus funds that have\nnot been claimed shall be deemed abandoned but shall be paid to the tax\ndistrict, not to the state comptroller, and shall be used by the tax\ndistrict to reduce its tax levy.\n 6. To the extent the provisions of article thirteen of the real\nproperty actions and proceedings law are inconsistent with the\nprovisions of this article, the provisions of this article shall govern.\n