Dryja v. Twarozynski
Opinion of the Court
The appellant, defendant, is a contractor who installed under a contract with defendant Jozef Twarozynski a heating plant in a dwelling house owned by the defendants Jozef Twarozynski and Walerya Twarozynski as tenants by the entirety. The heating plant was sold by the appellant, defendant, to defendant Jozef under a conditional sale contract which, however, was not filed in the county clerk’s office as required by section 67 of the Personal Property Law. The plaintiff in this action is seeking to foreclose a mortgage made by the defendants Twarozynski long before the purchase and installation of the heating plant. The plaintiff contends that the defendant Walerya, as well as her husband, was a buyer of the heating plant, but we are now determining the case upon the assumption that the defendant Walerya was not a buyer and did not assent to the reservation of title in the appellant, defendant. We assume, too, that the heating plant was so affixed to the realty as to become a part thereof under the provisions of section 67 of the Personal Property Law.
The question then arises under the last sentence of section 67 whether Walerya’s title is free from the lien of the conditional sales contract or is subject thereto, for if it is free from such hen, the plaintiff would seem to be in position to claim as mortgagee under defendant Walerya’s mortgage that his mortgage is also superior
The judgment should be modified on the law so as to strike therefrom the provisions affecting the defendant, appellant, and inserting in place thereof provisions in accordance with appellant, defendant’s demand for judgment in its answer and as modified should be affirmed with costs to the appellant, defendant, in this court and at the Special Term.
All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Thompson and Crosby, JJ.
On reargument judgment modified on the law so as to strike therefrom provisions affecting the appellant and inserting in place thereof provisions in accordance with the appellant’s demand for relief in its answer, and as so modified affirmed, with costs to the appellant in this court and at the Special Term.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.