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.
Gary GARAN, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. The PEOPLE of the State of New York, et al., Defendants, Sterling Commercial Capital, Inc., et al., Defendants-Appellants.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered on or about December 19, 1997, which, in an action to foreclose a mortgage, inter alia, ruled that plaintiffs' mortgage was not extinguished by a previous mortgage foreclosure and sale by defendant-appellant prior mortgagee, and denied the motion of the prior mortgagee and its nominee for summary judgment and cancellation of a notice of pendency, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
We agree with the IAS court that inquiry is appropriate into whether the nominally separate entity that took title to the property by way of a deed in lieu of foreclosure during the pendency of appellant's foreclosure action was truly separate or an alter ego of appellant created to defeat the rights of a subordinate lienor, and, if the latter, that equity should intervene to protect the subordinate lienor by declaring a merger of appellant's mortgage with the fee (see, Cambridge Factors v. Thompson, 215 A.D.2d 427, 626 N.Y.S.2d 259). Here, appellant's nominee was newly formed, had the same address as appellant, and took title without giving notice to plaintiffs even though appellant knew of plaintiffs' mortgage at that time. Further, after the deed had been delivered to its nominee, appellant, for unclear reasons, resumed prosecution of its long dormant foreclosure action without even advising the court of such deed. Under the circumstances, the court appropriately declared a merger.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 11, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
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)