24 Misc. 2d 875 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1960
This motion to set aside a Referee’s sale under judgment of foreclosure of mechanics’ liens is the end result, not of a comedy of errors but a tragedy of omissions.
The trial took place on December 6, 1958 and a decision was rendered by Mr. Justice Ritchie on the same day granting judgment to the plaintiff establishing his lien in the sum of $1,740 plus interest, granting judgment to the defendant Free-port Lumber establishing its lien in the sum of $3,435 plus interest and, pursuant to stipulation of the parties, adjudging both liens to be on a parity.
The successful parties omitted to have judgment signed until June 24, 1959 and the judgment was not entered until July 30,
On April 29, 1960, Mr. Rosenstein sold the property to Mr. and Mrs. Calvin Tann for the sum of $5,500. The Tanns have made substantial improvements to the property and though not parties to this action, oppose the principal motion as it may work a great hardship upon them.
Section 109-a of the Civil Practice Act authorizes the court “ in its discretion and upon such terms as justice requires ” (italics supplied) to set aside a judicial sale for any irregularity which may be prejudicial to the rights of any party. The failure to give notice of sale is such an irregularity. (Dickey v. Goertner, 146 N. Y. S. 264; Eidlitz v. Doctor, 24 Misc. 209.) The failure of the Referee to comply with section 1088 of the Civil Practice Act is also an irregularity, and in view of the unconscionably low price bid for the property, the court is constrained to view the rights of the plaintiff as having been seriously prejudiced. The facts are entirely different than those which the Appellate Division considered in Frazier v. Swimm (79 App. Div. 53) wherein the court recognized and affirmed the discretionary power of the lower court, but held on the facts that the power should not have been exercised.
Here, however, the court must also protect the innocent purchasers who have improved the property, and who undoubtedly relied upon the presumption of regularity which attends judicial sales. (See Leland v. Cameron, 31 N. Y. 115.) Conse