From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Malone v. Midlantic Bank, N.A.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Aug 4, 2000
334 N.J. Super. 236 (App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

DOCKET NO. A-5884-98T5

Argued July 24, 2000

Decided August 4, 2000

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Atlantic County.

Before Judges STEINBERG and LEFELT.

Richard A. Grossman argued the cause for appellants (Grossman, Kruttschnitt, Heavey Jacob, attorneys; Mr. Grossman, of counsel; Mr. Grossman and Roberta DiBiase, on the briefs).

Joseph P. Murray argued the cause for respondent.


This appeal arises from two decisions of Judge Gibson denying :

(1) defendant Robert Herdelin's motion under R. 4:50-1 to vacate a final judgment of foreclosure on a Brigantine condominium that had been obtained by plaintiff Monica Malone; and (2) defendants Geraldine Herdelin's and Wade McKissick's application as tenants in occupancy to redeem the Brigantine condominium in question.

After reviewing the record in light of the parties' arguments and the pertinent law, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Gibson in his April 23, 1999 oral decision dealing with Mr. Herdelin's claim and his September 9, 1999 decision, Malone v. Herdelin, published at 334 N.J. Super. 238, 758 A.2d 158 (Ch. Div. 2000), dealing with Ms. Herdelin's and Mr. McKissick's claims.

We add only that defendant Robert Herdelin never argued that the foreclosure judgment should be vacated under R. 4:50-1(f) when he was before Judge Gibson. Therefore, we need not consider this issue. Nieder v. Royal Indem. Ins. Co., 62 N.J. 229, 234 (1973). Nevertheless, we conclude that the circumstances presented do not justify relief from the judgment under this provision of the applicable rule.

We acknowledge that Mr. Herdelin allegedly will lose a substantial investment because of the foreclosure, and plaintiff's judgment constitutes a significant profit. However, to vacate plaintiff's judgment in this case would, in our opinion, significantly impair the integrity of the Recording Act. N.J.S.A. 46:22-1. There is simply no excuse for Mr. Herdelin's failure to record his deed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Malone v. Midlantic Bank, N.A.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Aug 4, 2000
334 N.J. Super. 236 (App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Malone v. Midlantic Bank, N.A.

Case Details

Full title:MONICA MALONE, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MIDLANTIC BANK, N.A., now known as…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Aug 4, 2000

Citations

334 N.J. Super. 236 (App. Div. 2000)
758 A.2d 157

Citing Cases

UTS Bechman, LLC v. Woodard

Plaintiff has not made any allegations that this is a "sham lease" intended to subvert the foreclosure…

UTS Bechman, LLC v. Woodard

See Malone v. Midlantic Bank & Herdelin, 334 N.J. Super 238 (Ch. Div.), aff'd, 334 N.J. Super 236 (App. Div.…