Legal Opinion

Petretti v. Finnigan

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 1972PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBernard S. Meyer, J.

In this action plaintiff seeks to set aside a conveyance of an interest in real property as in fraud of creditors. The property was held by defendants Thomas and Sandra Finnigan as tenants by the entirety and on October 28, 1969 was conveyed by them to Sandra Finnigan alone. Though executed and acknowledged on October 28, 1969, the deed was not recorded until April 24, 1970 at which time $5.50 *1008in revenue stamps was affixed. Thomas Finnigan is in default and both he and Sandra Finnigan, despite repeated advice from the court to retain lawyers, have failed to do so.

Plaintiff by summons dated…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In re GallagherNew York Surrogate's Court · 1929
  2. Berndt v. BerndtNew York Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Fox v. SizeLandNew York Supreme Court · 1938
  4. United States v. Harry Kaplan, and Annie KaplanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
  5. Cody v. HoveyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Myerson & Kuhn v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership (In Re Myerson & Kuhn)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1990
  2. Brownell Realty, Inc v. KellyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. Ed Moore Advertising Agency, Inc. v. I.H.R., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  4. Flint v. ShaimanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API