“A bona fide purchaser for value has been described as one which purchased property for ‘valuable consideration' and with no ‘knowledge' of an ‘alleged prior fraud by the seller.'” Irwin v. Regal 22 Corp., 175 A.D.3d 671, 672 (2d Dep't 2019) (internal citation omitted) (collecting cases).
"If the purchaser fails to use due diligence in examining the title, he or she is chargeable, as a matter of law, with notice of the facts which a proper inquiry would have disclosed" ( id. [internal quotation marks omitted]). Therefore, to establish itself as a bona fide purchaser for value, a party has the burden of proving that it purchased the property for valuable consideration and did not have "knowledge of facts that would lead a reasonably prudent purchaser to make inquiry" ( TCJS Corp. v. Koff, 74 A.D.3d 1188, 1189, 904 N.Y.S.2d 159 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeIrwin v. Regal 22 Corp., 175 A.D.3d 671, 672, 108 N.Y.S.3d 57 ; Berger v. Polizzotto, 148 A.D.2d 651, 651–652, 539 N.Y.S.2d 401 ). Here, Vertex established, prima facie, that it purchased the subject property for valuable consideration, without actual or constructive notice of the plaintiff's alleged interest (see139 Lefferts, LLC v. Melendez, 156 A.D.3d at 667, 67 N.Y.S.3d 240 ). Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, his filing of a notice of pendency against the property before Vertex filed its deed did not negate Vertex's status as a good-faith purchaser (seeAvila v. Arsada Corp., 34 A.D.3d 609, 610, 826 N.Y.S.2d 322 ).
The plaintiff appeals. Pursuant to Real Property Law § 266, a bona fide purchaser for value is protected in its title unless it had previous notice of an alleged fraud (seeIrwin v. Regal 22 Corp., 175 A.D.3d 671, 671–672, 108 N.Y.S.3d 57 ). To establish that it is a bona fide purchaser for value, a party has "the burden of proving that [it] purchased the property for valuable consideration and that [it] did not purchase with knowledge of facts that would lead a reasonably prudent purchaser to make inquiry" ( Berger v. Polizzotto, 148 A.D.2d 651, 651–652, 539 N.Y.S.2d 401 [citation and internal quotation marks omitted] ).
USC moves for summary judgment contending, inter alia, that it is a bona fide purchaser for value. Pursuant to Real Property Law § 266, a bona fide purchaser for value is protected in its title unless it had previous notice of an alleged fraud (see Irwin v Regal 22 Corp., 175 A.D.3d 671, 671-672 [2d Dept 2019]). To establish that it is a bona fide purchaser for value, a party has "the burden of proving that [it] purchased the property for valuable consideration and that [it] did not purchase with knowledge of facts that would lead a reasonably prudent purchaser to make inquiry" (Berger v Polizzotto, 148 A.D.2d 651, 651-652 [2d Dept 1989] [citation and internal quotation marks omitted]). "'[W]here a purchaser has knowledge of any fact, sufficient to put him on inquiry as to the existence of some right or title in conflict with that he is about to purchase, he is presumed either to have made the inquiry, and ascertained the extent of such prior right, or to have been guilty of a degree of negligence equally fatal to his claim, to be considered as a bona fide purchaser'" (Maioranov Garson, 65 A.D.3d 1300, 1303 [2d Dept 2009], quoting Williamson v Brown, 15 NY 354, 362 [1857]).
Real Property Law § 266 protects the title of a bona fide purchaser for value who lacked knowledge of an alleged fraud (Irwin v. Regal 22 Corp., 175 A.D.3d 671,' 671-672 [2d Dept 2019]). "A bona fide purchaser for value has been described as one which 'purchased property for valuable consideration and with no knowledge of an alleged prior fraud by the seller" (id.; quoting Emerson Hills Realty v. Mirabella, 220 A.D.2d 717 [2d Dept 1995]).
JJPB makes a sufficient initial showing that it is a bona fide purchaser for value of the Subject Property who is a necessary party to this action. Pursuant to Real Property Law § 266, a bona fide purchaser for value is protected in its title unless it had previous notice of an alleged fraud (see Irwin v. Regal 22 Corp., 175 A.D.3d 671, 671-672 [2d Dept 2019]). To establish that it is a bona fide purchaser for value, a party has "the burden of proving that [it] purchased the property for valuable consideration and that [it] did not purchase with knowledge of facts that would lead a reasonably prudent purchaser to make inquiry" (Cencore Properties, Inc. v Spitzer, 189 A.D.3d 983 [2d Dept 2020], quoting Berger v. Polizzotto, 148 A.D.2d 651, 651-652 [2d Dept 1989]). Here, JJPB submits the affidavit of its' sole member, Jude Bernard, who asserts that JJPB purchased the Subject Property from Williams for $650,000 in an arm's length transaction, without actual notice of plaintiff's alleged arrangement with Williams to acquire the Subject Property for her as an accommodation due to her inability to get funding.
Real Property Law § 266 protects the title of a bona fide purchaser for value who lacked knowledge of an alleged fraud (Irwin v. Regal 22 Corp., 175 AD3d 671, 671-672 [2d Dept 2019]). A bona fide purchaser for value has been described as one which purchased property tor valuable consideration" and with no knowledge of an alleged prior fraud by the seller (id.; quoting Emerson Hills Realty v. Mirabella, 220 AD2d 717 [2d Dept 1995]).