Legal Opinion
Goldstein v. Gold
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 8, 1985PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice (now Judge) Vito J. Titone at the Appellate Division (106 AD2d 100), only insofar as the opinion holds that the intervening defendant, who purchased the property encumbered by the mortgage, is bound by a notice of pendency filed prior to the recording of his deed and the satisfaction of mortgage.
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander. Taking no part: Judge Titone.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Goldstein v. GoldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
3Cited by34 opinions
- United States v. McCombsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- UNITED STATES v. McCOMBSCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- Morrocoy Marina, Inc. v. AltengartenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- 2386 Creston Avenue Realty, LLC v. M-P-M Management Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- 19 Court Street Associates, LLC v. Resolution Trust Corp. (In Re 19 Court Street Associates, LLC)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1996
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.