Legal Opinion

Lombardo v. Fielding

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 18, 1996PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Contrary to the appellants’ contention, RPAPL 1371 does not bar the instant action. New York law mandates that where a debt is secured by mortgages on two properties, and foreclosure of the first mortgage leaves a deficiency, the failure to obtain a deficiency judgment bars further proceedings to foreclose the second mortgage (see, RPAPL 1371; Sanders v Palmer, 68 NY2d 180). This requirement, however, applies only to mort*673gages secured by property located in New York State (see, Provident Sav. Bank & Trust Co. v Steinmetz, 270 NY 129; Yager v Rubymar Corp., 35 Misc 2d 517). Here, since the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sanders v. PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Provident Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. SteinmetzNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  3. Yager v. Rubymar Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1962

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Chemical Bank v. DanaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
  2. Volpe v. National Bank of GenevaNew York Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mtge. Corp. v. DanielAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API