From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beak v. Walts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 16, 1943
266 App. Div. 900 (N.Y. App. Div. 1943)

Opinion

June 16, 1943.

Present — Crosby, P.J., Cunningham, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.


Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, and counterclaim dismissed and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff for the relief demanded in the complaint. Certain findings of fact and conclusions of law disapproved and reversed and new findings and conclusions made. Memorandum: No bond accompanied the mortgage in question. McCabe agreed to assign the mortgage but not the debt to the defendants. A transfer of a mortgage without the debt is void. ( Merritt v. Bartholick, 36 N.Y. 44; Real Property Law, §§ 249, 251.) The agreement between McCabe and the defendants was not acknowledged or witnessed as required by section 290 Real Prop. of the Real Property Law and was not, therefore, a conveyance. ( Dunn v. Dunn, 151 App. Div. 800; Nellis v. Munson, 108 N.Y. 453; City of New York v. New York S.B. Ferry Co., 231 N.Y. 18; Sleeth v. Sampson, 237 N.Y. 69, 72.) The plaintiff was a purchaser of the mortgage and the mortgage debt in good faith and for a valuable consideration within the meaning of section 291 Real Prop. of the Real Property Law, and the agreement upon which the defendants rely is void as against the plaintiff's assignment which has been duly recorded. By accepting the assignment from McCabe, the plaintiff extended McCabe's time to pay his debt, and materially changed his own position by so doing and by surrendering to McCabe the note McCabe had given him for $605 and by surrendering to McCabe the original record of his purchases. Thus he became a purchaser for a valuable consideration. ( O'Brien v. Fleckenstein, 180 N.Y. 350.) The judgment should be reversed and judgment of foreclosure and sale be directed for the plaintiff. All concur. (The judgment dismisses plaintiff's complaint and directs plaintiff to specifically perform an agreement to assign a mortgage.)


Summaries of

Beak v. Walts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 16, 1943
266 App. Div. 900 (N.Y. App. Div. 1943)
Case details for

Beak v. Walts

Case Details

Full title:RALPH BEAK, Appellant, v. JOHN M. WALTS et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jun 16, 1943

Citations

266 App. Div. 900 (N.Y. App. Div. 1943)

Citing Cases

Wilmington Trust v. Wei P. Teo

139 NE 353 ["a mortgage given to secure notes is an incident to the latter and stands or falls with them"];…

United St. Extrs. Crp. v. Strahs Aluminum

However, here the record does not reflect sufficient evidence of the commercial arrangement to establish that…