From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MELE v. BONAGURA

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1915
172 App. Div. 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 1915)

Opinion

December, 1915.


The defendant Rosina Bonagura was brought into this action as administratrix of the goods and chattels of Salvatore Bonagura, deceased. In such capacity she did not become vested with the real property of the decedent. The absence from this action of the heirs at law or devisees of the decedent as parties defendant renders it impossible to uphold the judgment of foreclosure and sale. The judgment of the County Court of Kings county is reversed, with costs and disbursements of this appeal to the appellant, and a new trial is ordered, costs to abide the final award of costs. Jenks, P.J., Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.


Summaries of

MELE v. BONAGURA

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1915
172 App. Div. 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 1915)
Case details for

MELE v. BONAGURA

Case Details

Full title:Charles Mele, Respondent, v. Rosina Bonagura, as Executrix, etc., of…

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

Date published: Dec 1, 1915

Citations

172 App. Div. 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 1915)

Citing Cases

Matter of Merrill

The administrator has now instituted a proceeding against him for the recovery of this sum, presumably under…

Matter of Engel

In Dunning v. Ocean National Bank ( 61 N.Y. 497) the court says (at p. 501): "At the common law, an executor…