Rose v. Adler
New York Supreme Court
• Action by Aaron Rose and another against Fannie Adler for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property, or in the alternative to recover their deposit and expense of searching title. Judgment for the plaintiff for the amount of the deposit and the expenses of searching.
1Opinion of the CourtBenedict, J.
[1] In my opinion, the mortgage remaining open of record constituted a cloud upon defendant’s title so as to render it unmarketable. Undoubtedly if this were an action to which the holder of such mortgage or one claiming under him were a party, the court ought on the proof presented to hold the mortgage void because not recorded until after the recording of a subsequent conveyance by the mortgagor (under which defendant claims); which conveyance recites the payment of a valuable consideration, thus giving rise to the presumption that the grantee was a purchaser in good faith and for value.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Decker v. . BoiceNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Page v. . WaringNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Speakman v. ForepaughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
- Ward v. IsbillNew York Supreme Court · 1893
- Weideman v. ZielinskaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Rose v. AdlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914