Legal Opinion

Citibank (Mid-Hudson), N. A. v. Rohdie

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1975PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdward S. Conway, J.

This is a motion by Bankers Trust Company, the defendant in the first above-captioned action and the plaintiff in the second above-captioned action, for an order: (1) dismissing the complaint in the first action, the foreclosure action of Citibank (Mid-Hudson), N. A. (hereinafter referred to as Citibank), for failure to set forth in its complaint the fact that the second above-captioned action is presently pending in this court, as is required under section 1301 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law; or, in the alternative, for an order (2) staying the above-captioned foreclosure…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Irving Trust Co. v. SeltzerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1943
  2. Brandenberg v. TirinoNew York Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Gibbons v. GroatAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Dollar Dry Dock Bank v. Piping Rock Builders, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  2. Valley Savings Bank v. RoseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API