Legal Opinion
Merritt v. Dansmith Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 15, 1934PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHill, P. J.
The decision of this appeal involves a determination as to the priorities between hens for material, for labor, and that arising through the delayed recording of a mortgage given for the purchase price of the real property upon which a building was erected. The chronological sequence: July 9, 1932, defendant Fontana conveyed the unimproved real estate to the Dansmith Corporation. The deed was recorded two days later. Plaintiffs’ hen for materials used in the erection of the building was filed November ninth. A mortgage bearing date November third, from the grantee in the deed to the grantor…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Spring v. . ShortNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Giant Portland Cement Co. v. . StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Riverside Contracting Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Ebling Brewing Co. v. GennaroAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
- Giant Portland Cement Co. v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
3Cited by3 opinions
- Carrion v. 162 Pulaski, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. RottnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Carrion v. 162 Pulaski, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014