Legal Opinion

Grid Realty Corp. v. Winokur

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 21, 1978PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order modified to reinstate the second cause of action, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

On the first cause of action, the only issue that need be resolved is whether the notice of pendency was constructive notice to Travitsky of the mortgage foreclosure action. Angelo Sardo was properly made a party defendant in the foreclosure action, and the purchase of Sardo’s fee interest at the Sheriffs sale, which occurred after the filing of the notice of pendency, charged Travitsky with constructive notice of the foreclosure action, and he became bound by the…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Goldstein v. GoldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  2. Avila v. Arsada Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  3. DeVita v. City of PoughkeepsieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  4. Green Point Savings Bank v. DefourNew York Supreme Court · 1994
  5. U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. HurtadoNassau County District Court · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API