Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
CHASE MANHATTAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. HERITAGE SQUARE ASSOCIATION, Defendant-Appellant, Thomas Spina, et ux; State of New Jersey; Noel Olson and Robert Olson; and B.T. Credit Co.-VISA, Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
In this contested foreclosure action the Chancery Division was required to determine the priority of liens affecting mortgaged property. The only dispute was whether N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21 creates a lien having priority over a first mortgage lien recorded prior to April 1, 1996. The motion judge concluded that N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21 was designed to give a condominium association a lien for any unpaid assessment made by a condominium association for a share of common expenses or for “any other moneys duly owed the association,” N.J.S.A. 46:8B-21(a), but only granted a limited priority over mortgages recorded after April 1, 1996, and did not grant priority over mortgages already recorded as of April 1, 1996. In reaching this conclusion, the judge properly considered the “Historical and Statutory Notes” of L. 1995, c. 354, § 6, approved January 5, 1996, which provided: “This act shall take effect on the first day of the third month next following enactment [effective April 1, 1996], and shall not apply to or affect liens perfected prior to the effective date.”
We agree and affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Theodore Z. Davis in his written opinion. The condominium association lien recorded by defendant Heritage Square Association on February 18, 1997, does not have priority over the first mortgage lien held by plaintiff Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation recorded May 4, 1992.
KLEINER, J.A.D.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: June 07, 1999
Court: Superior Court of New Jersey,Appellate Division.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)