From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Home Savings of America v. Freidman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 6, 1994
205 A.D.2d 501 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

June 6, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the award of $2,500 is vacated.

The pro se defendants-respondents were tenants of the property that became the subject of the instant foreclosure action. The plaintiff was therefore obliged to join them as necessary parties in order to cut off their interest in the mortgaged premises (see, RPAPL 1311; Polish Natl. Alliance v. White Eagle Hall Co., 98 A.D.2d 400, 404; Flushing Sav. Bank v CCN Realty Corp., 73 A.D.2d 945; Empire Sav. Bank v. Towers Co., 54 A.D.2d 574). When they failed to answer the complaint, which had been personally served upon them, the plaintiff entered a default judgment against them. This judgment was subsequently vacated, after it was learned that they had moved out of their apartment on the premises. The award of $2,500 to them was therefore error. Copertino, J.P., Santucci, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Home Savings of America v. Freidman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 6, 1994
205 A.D.2d 501 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Home Savings of America v. Freidman

Case Details

Full title:HOME SAVINGS OF AMERICA, F.A., Appellant, v. LEAH FREIDMAN, Defendant, and…

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

Date published: Jun 6, 1994

Citations

205 A.D.2d 501 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
613 N.Y.S.2d 40

Citing Cases

QMB Holdings, LLC v. Escava Bros.

Conversely, the interest of a tenant who is not made a party to the foreclosure action is not affected by the…

Myers v. Leedy

To begin, on the question of whether a tenancy survives a foreclosure where the tenant is not made a party to…