Belsid Holding Corp. v. Dahm
| Decision Date | 14 November 1960 |
| Citation | 12 A.D.2d 499,207 N.Y.S.2d 91 |
| Parties | BELSID HOLDING CORP., Appellant, v. Frank C. DAHM and Lucille Wolfe Dahm, Respondents, and others, Defendants. Francis J. McCaffrey, Receiver-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Zipser & Levitt, New York City, Sidney N. Zipser, New York City, of counsel, for appellant.
Joseph A. Sinopoli, Yonkers, for respondent Dahm.
Francis J. McCaffrey, White Plains, pro. per.
Before NOLAN, P. J., and KLEINFELD, CHRIST, PETTE and BRENNAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage on real property, the plaintiff appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 25, 1960 and August 5, 1960, respectively.
The first order, dated July 25, 1960, grants the motion of defendant Frank C. Dahm and permits him to pay: (1) the entire unpaid balance of principal and interest owing on the mortgage, (2) the costs of the action, (3) the amount advanced for insurance premiums, and (4) the receiver's fee and expenses; and directs, inter alia, that upon the making of such payments the complaint be dismissed. The second order, dated August 5, 1960, grants plaintiff's motion for reargument, but adheres to the original determination.
Order of August 5, 1960, affirmed with $10 costs and disbursements.
Appeal from order of July 25, 1960, dismissed, without costs. This order was superseded by the later order of August 5, 1960.
The owner of the equity of redemption has a right to redeem at any time before an actual sale under a judgment of foreclosure (Nutt v. Cuming, 155 N.Y. 309, 49 N.E. 880; 15 Carmody-Wait, N.Y.Practice, p. 322, Mortgage Foreclosure, § 193, and cases there cited). The amount permitted to be paid here was not merely the total of this installments of principal and interest as to which there had been a default in payment, but the entire unpaid balance of the bond and mortgage. Such balance had become due by reason of the plaintiff mortgagee's exercise of his option under the mortgage to declare the entire balance due because of the defaults on the payment of the installments.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moore v. Aegon Reinsurance Co. of America
...granted renewal of the motions decided in the order dated February 4, 1993 and adhered to its original decision (Belsid Holding Corp. v. Dahm, 12 A.D.2d 499, 207 N.Y.S.2d 91). Accordingly, the appeal from the decision of the Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), dated Oct......
-
In re Pearson
...in default. If a mortgagor wishes to redeem the property, he must tender the full amount of the judgment. Belsid Holding Corp. v. Dahm, 12 A.D.2d 499, 207 N.Y.S.2d 91 (2d Dep't 1960). As between the parties, the judgment is "conclusive as to the amount of the mortgagee's lien on the premise......
-
In re Davidson Rehab Associates
...N.Y.Jur. Mortgages § 286; Marks, Maloney & Paterno, Mortgages & Mortgage Foreclosure in New York (1980); Belsid Holding Corp v. Dahm, 12 A.D.2d 499, 207 N.Y.S.2d 91 (2d Dep't 1960)). Because New York does not have a redemption statute, once the debtor's interests in property are extinguishe......
-
In re Lynch
...to redeem property in New York is limited to "any time before an actual sale under a judgment of foreclosure." Belsid Holding Corp. v. Dahm, 207 N.Y.S.2d 91, 12 A.D.2d 499 (1960). A similar finding was made in In Re Sparkman, 9 B.R. 359, 3 C.B.C.2d 856 (Bkrtcy.E.D.Pa.1981). In Sparkman, the......