Legal Opinion
Hamilton v. Hittleman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 2, 1928PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, J.
The plaintiff in a foreclosure action moved to confirm the report of sale of the referee. The court ordered instead that the sale be vacated and a resale had.
The impelling reason which was the cause of the result reached lay in the fact that the plaintiff had bid. in the property for the sum of $11,500 on this sale, whereas on a previous sale of the same property, which sale was subsequently vacated because there had been a defect of parties (the plaintiff having failed to make a second mortgagee a party), plaintiff had bid it in for the sum of $13,300. Upon the hearing of the motion, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Williamson v. DaleNew York Court of Chancery · 1818
- Goodell v. . HarringtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Himmelman v. 540 West 146th Street, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Misiaszek v. RobertsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
- Himmelman v. Capital City Surety Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bancplus Mortgage Corp. v. GallowayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Goldberg v. Feltman's of Coney Island, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1954
- National Bank of Stamford v. Van KeurenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- SRF Builders Capital Corp. v. VenturaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996