Legal Opinion

Constant v. University of Rochester

New York Court of Appeals

Decided May 24, 1892PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made December 17, 1891, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of tl\e court on trial at. Special Term.

Read the full summary

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made December 17, 1891, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of tl\e court on trial at. Special Term. This was an action for the foreclosure of an unrecorded mortgage executed by Elizabeth Mehen and Hugh Mehen, her husband, to Samuel S. Constant, plaintiffs’ testator, and priority is claimed over a recorded mortgage subsequently executed by the same mortgagors to the defendant herein. The following is the opinion in full: “ The prior unrecorded…

1Opinion of the Court

Maynard, J.,

reads for reversal.

All concur, except Andrews, Gray and O’Brien, JJ.. dissenting.

Judgment reversed.

2Cited by14 opinions

  1. Lopez v. . CampbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
  2. Shotwell v. . DixonNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
  3. Hood v. WebsterNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Ochenkowski v. DunajAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1931
  5. Cowles v. Board of Regents of the UniversityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1943

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

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

Powered by the Exa API