Kane Associates v. Blumenson
Kane Associates v. Blumenson
Opinion of the Court
Order affirmed, without costs, on the opinion at the Appellate Division. Question certified answered in the affirmative.
Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Soileppi, Bergan and Bkeitel. Judges Keating and Jasen dissent and vote to reverse and to reinstate the order of Special Term in the following memorandum.
Dissenting Opinion
Under settled law, a receiver in foreclosure is entitled to all rents, including those due but unpaid at the time of his appointment, which have not been reduced to the possession of the landlord at the time the receiver qualifies. (New York Life Ins. Co. v. Fulton Development Corp., 265 N. Y. 348; Rider v. Bagley, 84 N. Y. 461.) The facts of this case bring it squarely within this rule.
The rents were deposited into court, pursuant to stipulation, pending the outcome of a proceeding brought under article 7-A of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law. The court, however, was not the landlord’s agent and, until the clerk was
Order affirmed, etc.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Kane Associates, a Copartnership v. Philip Blumenson, Defendants Edward T. Klett v. Philip Blumenson
- Cited By
- 6 cases
- Status
- Published