History
  • No items yet
midpage
Goldstein v. Gold
66 N.Y.2d 624
NY
1985
Check Treatment

OPINION OF THE COURT

Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice (now Judge) Vito J. Titone at the Appellate Division (106 AD2d 100), only insofar as the opinion holds that the intervening defendant, who purchased the property encumbered by the mortgage, is bound by a notice of pendency filed prior to the recording of his deed and the satisfaction of mortgage.

Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander. Taking no part: Judge Titone.

Case Details

Case Name: Goldstein v. Gold
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Oct 8, 1985
Citation: 66 N.Y.2d 624
Court Abbreviation: NY
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.