People v. New York Title & Mortgage Co.

• Court: New York Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: CRANE
• Citation: 191 N.E. 723,265 N.Y. 30
• Decision Date: 03 July 1934
• Parties: PEOPLE, by VAN SCHAICK, Superintendent of Insurance, v. NEW YORK TITLE & MORTGAGE CO. CENTRAL HANOVER BANK & TRUST CO. v. VAN SCHAICK, Superintendent of Insurance.

265 N.Y. 30
191 N.E. 723

PEOPLE, by VAN SCHAICK, Superintendent of Insurance,
v.
NEW YORK TITLE & MORTGAGE CO.
CENTRAL HANOVER BANK & TRUST CO.
v.
VAN SCHAICK, Superintendent of Insurance.

Court of Appeals of New York.

July 3, 1934.

Proceedings by the People, by George S. Van Schaick, as Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, for an order to take possession of the property of, and to rehabilitate the New York Title & Mortgage Company, in which the Central Hanover Bank & Trust Company petitioned for relief against the Superintendent of Insurance as rehabilitator of the New York Title & Mortgage Company. From an order of the Appellate Division (241 App. Div. 807, 271 N. Y. S. 949), affirming an order of the Special Term (149 Misc. 488, 150 Misc. 351, 268 N. Y. S. 572), adverse to him, the Superintendent of Insurance appeals on certified questions.

Order affirmed, and questions answered.

The appeal comes here on the following sixteen certified questions:

‘1. On the facts appearing in the record herein, is the petitioner entitled to any of the relief awarded it by the order of Special Term, except so much thereof as modified the order of the court dated August 4, 1933, and except so much thereof as directed the appellant and ‘New York Title and Mortgage Company and/or their agents, servants or employees be and they are hereby directed to forthwith deliver to the petitioner herein any and all policies of insurance and all other papers and documents in their possession relative to the bond and mortgage referred to in the petition herein, and to transfer to petitioner the agreement dated February 28, 1931, assigning to the guarantor the rentals from said premises, and to supply the petitioner herein with all information in their possession or obtainable from their records relative thereto?’

‘2. On the facts appearing in the record herein, was the New York Title and Mortgage Company entitled to keep for its own use the moneys received between February 28, 1931, and December 1, 1932, from the rents and profits of the premises described in the record in refund of the moneys it paid out of its own funds to the petitioner on its guaranty to pay the installments of mortgage interest which came due on or about December 5, 1930, June 5, 1931, December 5, 1931, and June 5, 1932?

‘3. On the facts appearing in the record herein, was the New York Title and Mortgage Company entitled to keep for its own use the moneys received between February 28, 1931, and December 1, 1932, from the rents and profits described in the record in refund of the moneys it paid out of its own funds to the petitioner on its guaranty to pay the installments of mortgage principal which came due on June 5, 1931, and December 5, 1931?

‘4. On the facts appearing in the record herein, was the New York Title and Mortgage Company a trustee for the petitioner of the said moneys so received?

‘5. On the facts appearing in the record herein, did a debtor-creditor relationship between New York Title and Mortgage Company and petitioner arise as to said moneys so received?

‘6. On the facts appearing in the record herein, was the New York Title and Mortgage Company entitled to keep for its own use the moneys received by it from the mortgagor subsequent to December 1, 1932, and prior to June 1, 1933?

‘7. On the facts appearing in the record herein, was the New York Title and Mortgage Company a trustee for the petitioner of the said moneys?

‘8. On the facts appearing in the record herein, did a debtor-creditor relationship between the New York Title and Mortgage Company and petitioner arise as to said moneys?

‘9. On the facts appearing in the record herein, is the...