Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Co-ops and Condominiums

By ssalkin
June 01, 2020

Condominium Lien Enjoys Priority Over Mortgage

Great Homes Group, LLC v. GMAC Mortgage, LLC NYLJ 2/28/20, p. 29, col. 5 AppDiv, Second Dept. (memorandum opinion)

In a quiet title action by purchaser of a condominium unit who sought a determination that its interest was not encumbered by a mortgage executed by a former owner, purchaser appealed from Supreme Court's grant of summary judgment to mortgagee. The Appellate Division reversed, holding that mortgagee had failed to establish that its interest was superior to the lien on which the condominium association had foreclosed.

Gary and Deborah Parks bought the subject condominium in 1990. They financed the purchase with two mortgages, a first mortgage for $226,400 in favor of Home Saving and a second mortgage for $40,000 in favor of their seller, Scappaticci. In 1994, Scappaticci died. The following year, Gary executed a quitclaim deed to Deborah, who then executed a mortgage in favor of GMAC's predecessor for $273,000. Two years later, Deborah executed a mortgage in favor of JP Morgan for $75,000, subject only to the GMAC mortgage. In 2012, GMAC brought an action to foreclose its mortgage. Three years later, the condominium association filed a lien for unpaid common charges, and then brought a foreclosure action. Great Homes purchased the unit by referee's deed as a result of the foreclosure sale and then brought this action to establish that its interest was not encumbered by the GMAC mortgage. Supreme Court granted summary judgment to GMAC, and Great Homes appealed.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.