United States v. Buffalo Savings Bank, 96

Decision Date07 January 1963
Docket NumberNo. 96,96
Citation9 L.Ed.2d 283,371 U.S. 228,83 S.Ct. 314
PartiesUNITED STATES, Petitioner, v. BUFFALO SAVINGS BANK
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

John B. Jones, Jr., for petitioner.

John H. Little, Buffalo, N.Y., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

In 1946, respondent Buffalo Savings Bank made a loan secured by a real estate mortgage. The United States filed notice of a federal tax lien against the mortgagor's property in 1953. Thereafter, in 1957 and 1958, liens for unpaid real estate taxes and other local assessments at- tached to the property. The bank instituted foreclosure proceedings, naming the United States as a party. The trial court's decree ordered the property sold and the payment of local real estate taxes and other assessments as part of the expenses of the sale prior to the satisfaction of the tax lien of the United States. The United States appealed and the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, reversed, only to be reversed in turn by the New York Court of Appeals, which reinstated the trial court's judgment on the ground that the federal tax lien attached only to the mortgagor's interest in the surplus after the foreclosure sale and therefore was subordinate to the local taxes as 'expenses of sale.' 11 N.Y.2d 31, 226 N.Y.S.2d 382, 181 N.E.2d 413.

We must reverse the judgment of the New York Court of Appeals for failure to take proper account of United States v. New Britain, 347 U.S. 81, 74 S.Ct. 367, 98 L.Ed. 520. That case rules this one, for there the Court quite clearly held that federal tax liens have priority over subsequently accruing liens for local real estate taxes, even though the burden of the local taxes in the event of a shortage would fall upon the mortgagee whose claim under state law is subordinate to local tax liens.

A similar argument based on the general character of the federal tax lien was made and specifically rejected in New Britain. Moreover, the state may not avoid the priority rules of the federal tax lien by the formalistic device of characterizing subsequently accruing local liens as expenses of sale. Cf. United States v. Gilbert Associates, Inc., 345 U.S. 361, 73 S.Ct. 701, 97 L.Ed. 1071. Finally, respondent's reliance on United States v. Brosnan, 363 U.S. 237, 80 S.Ct. 1108, 4 L.Ed.2d 1192, and Crest Finance Co. v. United States, 368 U.S. 347, 82 S.Ct. 384, 7 L.Ed.2d 342, is misplaced. Brosnan was concerned with foreclosure procedures, not with priorities, and in connection with the latter subject...

To continue reading

Request your trial
40 cases
  • United States v. State of Vermont
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • May 9, 1963
    ...upon us post-New Britain decisions of the Supreme Court under the tax lien statutes. Of these, only United States v. Buffalo Savings Bank, 371 U.S. 228, 83 S.Ct. 314, 9 L.Ed.2d 283 (1963), concerns rival liens arising from tax assessments of a state or municipality, and it adds nothing rele......
  • WT Jones and Company v. Foodco Realty, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • May 21, 1963
    ...v. Waddill, Holland & Flinn, Inc., 323 U.S. 353, 357, 65 S.Ct. 304, 89 L.Ed. 294 (1945); cf. United States v. Buffalo Savings Bank, 371 U.S. 228, 229, 83 S.Ct. 314, 9 L.Ed.2d 283 (1963). We are instead bound to look to federal law, as announced by the Supreme Court, for the final answer. Aq......
  • 11 293 Meyer v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • December 16, 1963
    ...though lien A, superior to the federal lien, is cut out because under local law it is inferior to lien B. United States v. Buffalo Savings Bank, 371 U.S. 228, 83 S.Ct. 314, 9 L.Ed.2d 283; United States v. City of New Britain, 347 U.S. 81, 74 S.Ct. 367, 98 L.Ed. 520. In the case at bar there......
  • Fischer v. Hoyer
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • May 16, 1963
    ...therefore not of the preferred class. In a very recent case entitled United States v. Buffalo Savings Bank, decided January 7, 1963, 371 U.S. 228, 83 S.Ct. 314, 9 L.Ed.2d 283, the Supreme Court of the United States held that in the foreclosure of a mortgage, it was improper for the court to......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT