From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goff v. George

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 1968
31 A.D.2d 579 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Opinion

November 21, 1968


MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT. Reargument of appeal from judgment of the Supreme Court, entered March 17, 1967, in Ulster County. (See 29 A.D.2d 574.) When this case was before us previously ( 29 A.D.2d 574) we held that "the tax deed is not sufficiently accurate to locate the property in question and therefore its purported conveyance of title is ineffective" (p. 575) and, accordingly, reversed a judgment in favor of the defendant and granted judgment to the plaintiff. We find advanced upon reargument no reason to disturb this position. Nor do we find available to defendants the defenses of estoppel under the factual situation here involved (see, Trenton Banking Co. v. Duncan, 86 N.Y. 221, 230) or of the Statute of Limitations since it was not pleaded as an affirmative defense ( Lindlots Realty Co. v. County of Suffolk, 278 N.Y. 45, 54; CPLR 3018, subd. [b]). On reargument, the court adheres to the original determination. Herlihy, J.P., Reynolds, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by the court.


Summaries of

Goff v. George

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 1968
31 A.D.2d 579 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)
Case details for

Goff v. George

Case Details

Full title:PERCY GOFF, Appellant, v. HERBERT L. GEORGE et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Nov 21, 1968

Citations

31 A.D.2d 579 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Citing Cases

Tilbury Fabrics, Inc. v. Stillwater, Inc.

We do not agree with Special Term that the arbitrators exceeded their authority in making any award to…

Harbor Hills Landowners v. Manelski

Hence, the defendant cannot avail himself of this defense. (CPLR 3018, subd. [b]; Dunning v. Dunning, 275…