Hospital Service Plan of New Jersey v. Warehouse Production & Sales Emp. Union
| Decision Date | 21 January 1980 |
| Citation | 424 N.Y.S.2d 647,102 Misc.2d 872 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
| Parties | HOSPITAL SERVICE PLAN OF NEW JERSEY, etc., et al. v. WAREHOUSE PRODUCTION & SALES EMPLOYEES UNION, etc., et al. |
Lunney & Crocco, New York City (Luigi P. DeMaio, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs.
Friedlander, Gaines, Cohen, Rosenthal & Rosenberg, New York City (Edward Cherney, New York City, of counsel), for defendants.
By order to show cause dated November 19, 1979 the defendants have moved for an order directing the plaintiffs-judgment creditors to execute and deliver to them a satisfaction piece of a certain judgment heretofore recovered by the plaintiffs against the said defendants.
It appears that on April 5, 1976 the plaintiffs recovered a judgment against the defendants in the sum of $106,290.64. On November 4, 1976 the said judgment was filed and recorded in the office of the Clerk of the County of Queens. The judgment was docketed pursuant to CPLR article 54. CPLR 5402 provides: The rule is well settled that once a judgment is filed it becomes the equivalent of one rendered by the New York Supreme Court. However, this is for the purpose of enforcement. (Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons.Laws of N.Y., CPLR 5402, C5402:2, p. 505.) To do otherwise would be an unlawful interference with the full faith and credit standards as enunciated by the Supreme Court of the United States. (Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 95 Misc. 326, 407 N.Y.S.2d 373.)
It is undisputed that rule 4:42-11(a) of the rules governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey provides that judgments should bear simple interest in the amount of the award of eight percent per annum from the date of entry, except as otherwise ordered by the Court.
The issue raised by the defendants is that once the judgment is filed in our State the interest due on said judgment is limited by the legal statutory ceiling of six percent. The tender in satisfaction to judgment encompasses this rate of interest and not the interest as provided for in the State of New Jersey.
The Court finds that this tender is insufficient to warrant a direction by the Court for a satisfaction piece. Implicit in this determination is a finding by the Court that the statutory interest provided for by the State of New...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Seaboard Sur. Co. v. Waterbury
...of the defendant's indebtedness. Burchett v. Roncari, 181 Conn. 125, 129, 434 A.2d 941 (1980); accord Hospital Service v. Warehouse Production, 102 Misc.2d 872, 424 N.Y.S.2d 647 (1980); Joplin Corporation v. State ex rel. Grimes, 570 P.2d 1161, 1163 (Okla.1977). Furthermore, the foreign jud......
-
First of Denver Mortg. Investors v. Riggs, s. 59563
...of filing for purposes of enforcement. New York State has adopted the Uniform Act. In Hospital Service Plan of New Jersey v. Warehouse Production & Sales Employees Union, 102 Misc.2d 872, 424 N.Y.S.2d 647 (Supp.1980), the New York Court said, "The rule is well settled that once a judgment i......
-
Herring v. Bagnell
...creditor to be deprived of his interest if the rate of the sister state is lower" (Hospital Serv. Plan of N.J. (N.J. Blue Cross Plan) v. Warehouse Prod. & Sales Empls. Union , 102 Misc 2d 872, 873—874 [Sup Ct, Queens County 1980, Rodell, J.], affd 76 AD2d 882 [1980] ). Therefore, this Court......
-
Herring v. Bagnell
...creditor to be deprived of his interest if the rate of the sister state is lower" (Hospital Serv. Plan of N.J. (N.J. Blue Cross Plan) v Warehouse Prod. & Sales Empls. Union, 102 Misc 2d 872, 873—874 [Sup Ct, Queens County 1980, Rodell, J.], affd 76 AD2d 882 [1980]). Therefore, this Court fi......