From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mertz Trust v. Fox Meadow Partners

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 25, 2002
295 A.D.2d 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-09913

Submitted May 21, 2002.

June 25, 2002.

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants appeal from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), dated October 11, 2001, which, upon an order of the same court, dated May 1, 2001, denying their motion to reject the report of a Referee, which, inter alia, computed the amount due and owing on the plaintiff's note and mortgage as of September 1, 2000, and granting the plaintiff's cross motion to confirm the report, inter alia, confirmed the report of the Referee.

Thomas F. Cunningham, LaGrangeville, N.Y., for appellants.

Birbrower, Montalbano, Condon Frank, P.C., New City, N.Y., and Dewey Ballantine, New York, N.Y. (Richard H. Sarajian of counsel), for respondent (one brief filed).

Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., DAVID S. RITTER, LEO F. McGINITY, HOWARD MILLER, JJ.


ORDERED that the amended judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court considered the defendants' evidence and correctly concluded that their contentions with respect to the principal sum due under the note and mortgage were without merit (see Stein v. American Mtge. Banking, 216 A.D.2d 458; Adelman v. Fremd, 234 A.D.2d 488, 489).

The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.

PRUDENTI, P.J., RITTER, McGINITY and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mertz Trust v. Fox Meadow Partners

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 25, 2002
295 A.D.2d 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Mertz Trust v. Fox Meadow Partners

Case Details

Full title:ESTHER M. MERTZ TRUST, ETC., respondent, v. FOX MEADOW PARTNERS, LTD., et…

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

Date published: Jun 25, 2002

Citations

295 A.D.2d 558 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
744 N.Y.S.2d 708

Citing Cases

NYCTL 1996-1 Trust v. Westmoreland Associates

In opposition to the plaintiffs' motion to confirm the referee's findings, the appellants revisited arguments…