From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pysa Realty Corp. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 22, 2005
23 A.D.3d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

7131.

November 22, 2005.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saralee Evans, J.), entered March 26, 2004, which denied petitioner's motion to vacate an in rem judgment of foreclosure granted on default, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac DeCicco, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Susan Smollens of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Sullivan and Malone, JJ., concur.


Petitioner's conclusory denial of receipt of notice of the foreclosure action was insufficient to rebut the presumption of receipt raised by the deed conveying title to the City ( see In Rem Tax Foreclosure Action No. 44, Borough of Bronx, 2 AD3d 241). Moreover, here, the presumption of receipt became conclusive when, four months after entry of final judgment, petitioner had not yet instituted proceedings to set aside the deed ( see Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-412.1 [h]). We note as well that petitioner has not substantiated its claim that the judgment of foreclosure was erroneously premised upon miscalculated delinquent tax assessments.

We have reviewed petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Pysa Realty Corp. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 22, 2005
23 A.D.3d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Pysa Realty Corp. v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:IN REM TAX FORECLOSURE ACTION NO. 44. PYSA REALTY CORP., Appellant, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 22, 2005

Citations

23 A.D.3d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 8873
808 N.Y.S.2d 12

Citing Cases

King Ctr. Corp. v. City of Middletown (In re King Ctr. Corp.)

As examples, it points to In re Tax Foreclosure No. 35 , 71 N.Y.2d 863, 865, 527 N.Y.S.2d 747, 522 N.E.2d…

In re Tax Foreclosure Action Borough of Brooklyn

It also states that an action to set aside a deed may not be maintained "unless the action is commenced and a…