Legal Opinion
Reisman v. William Hartmann & Son, Inc.
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 20, 1966PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHarold Tessler, J.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage on real property, the plaintiffs move (1) for summary judgment, (2) for the appointment of a referee to compute the amount due on the mortgage and the note, including counsel fees, as set forth in the note and (3) to amend the caption of the action.
The facts are not disputed. On July 16, 1965, the corporate defendant, William Hartmann & Son, Inc., executed a note for $15,000 at 6% interest, which was to be self-amortizing and repaid in 60 equal monthly installments of $290 each, including interest. The individual defendants, William Hartmann and Agnes…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rosa v. . ButterfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Union Estates Co. v. . Adlon Construction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Feldman v. Kings Highway Savings BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951
3Cited by3 opinions
- Band Realty Co. v. North Brewster, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. Ayers, New York County Courts1981
- Flushing National Bank v. Pinetop Building Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976