Legal Opinion

Mooney v. Provident Savings Bank

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided August 11, 1997PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McGANN, J.S.C., retired and temporarily assigned on recall.

Plaintiffs, Mooney (husband and wife) bring this action to cancel of record four open mortgages which cloud the title to their residence located at 510 West End Avenue, Avon, New Jersey. Three of those mortgages are in the name of The Provident Savings Bank (hereinafter “Provident”) and one in the names of the Dioguardis (husband and wife). The applicable statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:51-1 provides (as pertinent to the facts of this case) as follows:

2A:51-1. When authorized; proof required. Where a mortgage on real estate .... is recorded in…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Williams v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
  2. Wright v. Union Central Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Burlingham v. CrouseSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. Crane v. BielskiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
  5. Martindell v. Fiduciary Counsel, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1943

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. BCGS, L.L.C. v. JasterAppellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  2. Hunter v. Sterling Bank, W.G.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
  3. BCGS, L.L.C. v. JasterAppellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  4. BCGS, LLC v. JasterAppellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  5. Mooney v. Provident Savings BankNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API