From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. McInnis Realty Co.

Supreme Court, New York Special Term
Dec 1, 1909
65 Misc. 307 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1909)

Opinion

December, 1909.

Albert F. Sharpe, for plaintiff.

Weschler Rothschild, for defendant Louis B. Rosenberg.


I do not see from these pleadings how the defendant Rosenberg is involved at all in this litigation, except in being arbitrarily made a defendant. He was a purchaser for value at a foreclosure sale under mortgages that are in nowise attacked as to validity, nor is an attempt made to impeach the proceedings. Whatever issue is raised as between plaintiff and the realty company may be litigated, but it must proceed, it seems to me, with the fact established that the realty company has been regularly and legally divested of the fee to the realty and that Rosenberg is the owner thereof, subject to the lien of the mortgages not cut off by the foreclosure under which he bought. Whoever the owner of the $8,000 mortgage may prove to be is a matter Rosenberg is only concerned in to the extent that he recognizes that his property is burdened with that lien; but this does not justify his being made a party to the suit and certainly will not permit of his title being clouded with the filing of a lis pendens in a suit to determine that issue, because it cannot be said but that the rights of the litigants may be determined and the title remain the same, the action in nowise being to determine a title to the fee or an interest in realty within the meaning of the Code. The motion is granted, with ten dollars costs.

Motion granted.


Summaries of

Clark v. McInnis Realty Co.

Supreme Court, New York Special Term
Dec 1, 1909
65 Misc. 307 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1909)
Case details for

Clark v. McInnis Realty Co.

Case Details

Full title:BESSE C. CLARK, Plaintiff, v . A.N. McINNIS REALTY COMPANY et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, New York Special Term

Date published: Dec 1, 1909

Citations

65 Misc. 307 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1909)
121 N.Y.S. 683

Citing Cases

5303 Realty v. O Y Equity

In contrast, a trespass action seeking money damages only did not justify a notice of pendency as the…