equitable subrogation doctrine in New York

2020Footnote 3: To the extent that defendant contends that plaintiff was incorrectly granted summary judgment on the merits of the equitable subrogation claim, we find such contention to be without merit ( see generally King v Pelkofski , 20 NY2d at 333 ).

2020Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation, "[w]here property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder" ( King v Pelkofski , 20 NY2d 326, 333 [internal quotation marks omitted]).

2024The doctrine of equitable subrogation "is broad enough to include every instance in which one party pays a debt for which another is primarily answerable and which in equity and good conscience should have been discharged by the latter, so long as the payment was made either under compulsion or for the protection of some interest of the party making the payment, and in discharge of an existing liability" ( Gerseta Corp. v Equitable Trust Co. of NY , 241 NY 418, 425-426 [1926]).

2024The doctrine of equitable subrogation "is broad enough to include every instance in which one party pays a debt for which another is primarily answerable and which in equity and good conscience should have been discharged by the latter, so long as the payment was made either under compulsion or for the protection of some interest of the party making the payment, and in discharge of an existing liability" ( Gerseta Corp. v Equitable Trust Co. of NY , 241 NY 418, 425-426 [1926]).

2017While the doctrine of equitable subrogation would apply to the extent that the proceeds from the first Wells Fargo mortgage were used to pay off the Greenpoint mortgage (see Zeidel v Dunne, 215 AD2d 472, 474 [1995]; Whitestone Sav. & Loan Assn. v Moring, 286 App Div 1042, 1043 [1955]), the plaintiffs’ success on their original complaint would have resulted in the reduction of Wells Fargo’s mortgage lien on the premises.

2010In order to avoid the unjust enrichment of the intervening, unknown lienor, the mortgagee is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the senior incumbrance.” (King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333-334 [1967]; see also Wagner v Maenza, 223 AD2d 640 [2d Dept 1996]; Zeidel v Dunne, 215 AD2d 472 [2d Dept 1995].) Defendant US Bank urges the court to find that equitable subrogation applies here and determine that its mortgage is superior to that of plaintiffs based on the fact that the funds of its predecessor, Mortgage Lenders, were used to pay off the preexisting mortgages against the premises hel

2018Defendant would therefore be unjustly enriched if the doctrine of equitable subrogation were not applied, as denial of this equitable remedy "would provide a windfall to [defendant] by allowing [her] to have [her] original mortgage debt extinguished while at the same time maintain a right to the subject property that is superior to the mortgagee that furnished the funds that extinguished the first mortgage" ( Elwood v Hoffman , 61 AD3d at 1076 ; see King v Pelkofski , 20 NY2d at 334 ).

2014The doctrine of equitable subrogation is: “ ‘Where property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder.’ ” (Elwood v Hoffman, 61 AD3d 1073, 1075 [2009], quoting King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333 [1967]; see also Chemical Bank v Meltzer, 93 NY2d 296, 304 [1999]; Gerseta Corp. v Equitable Trust Co. of N.Y., 241 NY 418, 425-426 [1926].

2019Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation, where the "premises of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the premises of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder" ( King v Pelkofski , 20 NY2d 326, 333 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Lucia v Goldman , 145 AD3d 767, 769 ; First Franklin Fin.

2019Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation, "[w]here property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder" ( King v Pelkofski , 20 NY2d 326, 333 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Lucia v Goldman , 145 AD3d 767, 769 ; First Franklin Fin.

2023"The doctrine operates to 'erase[ ] the lender's mistake in failing to discover intervening liens, and grants him the benefit of having obtained an assignment of the senior lien that he caused to be discharged'" ( Arbor Commercial Mtge., LLC v Associates at the Palm , 95 AD3d 1147 , 1149 quoting United States v Baran , 996 F2d 25, 29 [2d Cir]).

2018This principle has been applied to situations, like that present here, "where the funds of a mortgagee are used to satisfy the lien of an existing, known incumbrance when, unbeknown to the mortgagee, another lien on [or interest in] the property exists which is senior to his [or her] but junior to the one satisfied with his [or her] funds" ( id. at 333-334 ; see Arbor Commercial Mtge., LLC v Associates at the Palm, LLC , 95 AD3d 1147, 1149-1150 [2012]; Elwood v Hoffman , 61 AD3d 1073, 1075 [2009]).

2018Pursuant to the doctrine of equitable subrogation, where the " property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder'" ( King v Pelkofski , 20 NY2d 326, 333 , quoting Restatement of Restitution § 162; see Lucia v Goldman , 145 AD3d 767, 769 ; Harris v Thompson , 117 AD3d 791, 793 ; Cashel v Cashel , 94 AD3d 684, 688 ).

2016The plaintiff appeals. *769 Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation, where the “property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder” (K ing v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333 [1967] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Harris v Thompson, 117 AD3d 791, 793 [2014]; Cashel v Cashel, 94 AD3d 684, 688 [2012]).

2010It is well established that when an insurer pays for losses sustained by its insured that were occasioned by a wrongdoer, the insurer is entitled to seek recovery of the monies it expended under the doctrine of equitable subrogation (Fasso v Doerr, 12 NY3d 80, 86 [2009]).

2009On the other hand, “when an insurer pays for losses sustained by its insured that were occasioned by a wrongdoer, the insurer is entitled to seek recovery of the monies it expended under the doctrine of equitable subrogation” (Fasso v Doerr, 12 NY3d 80, 86 [2009]).

2010Suffolk, 87 NY2d 514, 520 [1996]), it is irrelevant inasmuch as the Health Plan is not now seeking to assert a contract reimbursement claim against the plaintiff but an equitable subrogation claim against the defendants. .

2004Suffolk, 87 NY2d 514, 523 [1996]).

1932(Halsey v. Reed, 9 Paige, 446, 451 ; King v. Whitely, 10 id. 465, 468 .) This equitable rule, however, in my’opinion, is not to be extended to a similar assumption clause or agreement contained in a second mortgage executed by the owner and prior mortgagor.

1932(Halsey v. Reed, 9 Paige, 446, 451 ; King v. Whitely, 10 id. 465, 468 .) This equitable rule, however, in my’opinion, is not to be extended to a similar assumption clause or agreement contained in a second mortgage executed by the owner and prior mortgagor.

2012To the extent that our decisions in Bank One v Mon Leang Mui ( 38 AD3d 809 [2007]), Roth v Porush ( 281 AD2d 612 [2001]), and R.C.P.S.

2009Given the existence of triable issues of fact as to whether the appellants were on notice of the July 2005 mortgage at the time they executed their mortgage, the Supreme Court erred in granting those branches of the plaintiffs motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint and to strike the affirmative defense of equitable subrogation asserted in the answer (see King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326 [1967]; Roth v Porush, 281 AD2d 612 [2001]; cf. LaSalle Bank Natl.

2025Trust Co. v Weinfeld , 227 AD3d 662, 663, quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Burke , 155 AD3d 668, 670).

2018A cause of action seeking to establish a lien pursuant to the doctrine of equitable subrogation is governed by a six-year statute of limitations, which begins to run upon the occurrence of the wrongful act giving rise to a duty of restitution ( see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Burke , 155 AD3d at 670 ; Ponnambalam v Sivaprakasapillai , 35 AD3d 571, 574 ).

2025LLC v Adee , 172 AD3d at 1695; RTR Props., LLC v Sagastume , 145 AD3d 697, 698-699 [2d Dept 2016]).

2023Here, since Nationstar failed to show that its predecessor in interest lacked actual knowledge of the March 2007 judgment lien in 2009 when the predecessor in interest provided funds to the Furtermans which were used to satisfy a then-existing first priority lien, the referee did not err in determining that Nationstar failed to establish the applicability of the doctrine of equitable subrogation ( see RTR Props., LLC v Sagastume , 145 AD3d at 699 ).

2018Pursuant to the doctrine of equitable subrogation, where the " property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder'" ( King v Pelkofski , 20 NY2d 326, 333 , quoting Restatement of Restitution § 162; see Lucia v Goldman , 145 AD3d 767, 769 ; Harris v Thompson , 117 AD3d 791, 793 ; Cashel v Cashel , 94 AD3d 684, 688 ).

2016The plaintiff appeals. *769 Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation, where the “property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lien-holder” (K ing v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333 [1967] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Harris v Thompson, 117 AD3d 791, 793 [2014]; Cashel v Cashel, 94 AD3d 684, 688 [2012]).

2017While the doctrine of equitable subrogation would apply to the extent that the proceeds from the first Wells Fargo mortgage were used to pay off the Greenpoint mortgage (see Zeidel v Dunne, 215 AD2d 472, 474 [1995]; Whitestone Sav. & Loan Assn. v Moring, 286 App Div 1042, 1043 [1955]), the plaintiffs’ success on their original complaint would have resulted in the reduction of Wells Fargo’s mortgage lien on the premises.

1996In order to avoid the unjust enrichment of the intervening, unknown lienor, the mortgagee is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the senior incumbrance” (King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333-334 ; see also, Zeidel v Dunne, 215 AD2d 472 ; Whitestone Sav. & Loan Assn. v Moring, 286 App Div 1042 ).

2010In order to avoid the unjust enrichment of the intervening, unknown lienor, the mortgagee is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the senior incumbrance.” (King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333-334 [1967]; see also Wagner v Maenza, 223 AD2d 640 [2d Dept 1996]; Zeidel v Dunne, 215 AD2d 472 [2d Dept 1995].) Defendant US Bank urges the court to find that equitable subrogation applies here and determine that its mortgage is superior to that of plaintiffs based on the fact that the funds of its predecessor, Mortgage Lenders, were used to pay off the preexisting mortgages against the premises hel

2010In order to avoid the unjust enrichment of the intervening, unknown lienor, the mortgagee is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the senior incumbrance.” (King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333-334 [1967]; see also Wagner v Maenza, 223 AD2d 640 [2d Dept 1996]; Zeidel v Dunne, 215 AD2d 472 [2d Dept 1995].) Defendant US Bank urges the court to find that equitable subrogation applies here and determine that its mortgage is superior to that of plaintiffs based on the fact that the funds of its predecessor, Mortgage Lenders, were used to pay off the preexisting mortgages against the premises hel

1996In order to avoid the unjust enrichment of the intervening, unknown lienor, the mortgagee is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the.senior incumbrance” (King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333-334 ; see also, Zeidel v Dunne, 215 AD2d 472, 473 ; Boston Trade Bank v Kuzon, 154 Misc 2d 217 ).

1995In order to avoid the unjust enrichment of the intervening, unknown lienor, the mortgagee is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the senior incumbrance” (King v Pelkofski, 20 NY2d 326, 333-334 ; see also, Boston Trade Bank v Kuzon, 154 Misc 2d 217 ).

2025The foregoing supports Supreme Court's finding that Visions had actual knowledge of the NYBDC mortgage at the time of the discharge of the 2009 Visions mortgage and issuance of the 2015 Visions mortgage, precluding the application of the doctrine of equitable subrogation ( see Matter of Kissous v Futerman , 217 AD3d 1002, 1004 [2d Dept 2023]; Nationstar Mtge.

2025Trust Co. v McAvoy , 188 AD3d 808, 810, quoting Schwartz v Walter , 171 AD3d 969, 970). "'A cause of action seeking to establish a lien pursuant to . . . the doctrine of equitable subrogation is governed by a six-year statute of limitations'" ( Deutsche Bank Natl.

2025Trust Co. v McAvoy , 188 AD3d 808, 810, quoting Schwartz v Walter , 171 AD3d 969, 970). "'A cause of action seeking to establish a lien pursuant to . . . the doctrine of equitable subrogation is governed by a six-year statute of limitations'" ( Deutsche Bank Natl.

2024Indeed, the rationale behind the doctrine of equitable subrogation is "that the party who causes injury or damage should be required to bear the loss by reimbursing the insurer for payments made on behalf of the injured party" ( NYP Holdings, Inc. v McClier Corp. , 65 AD3d 186, 189 [1st Dept 2009] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Brown v Bellamy , 170 AD2d 876, 877-878 [3d Dept 1991], lv denied 78 NY2d 853 [1991]).

2024Indeed, the rationale behind the doctrine of equitable subrogation is "that the party who causes injury or damage should be required to bear the loss by reimbursing the insurer for payments made on behalf of the injured party" ( NYP Holdings, Inc. v McClier Corp. , 65 AD3d 186, 189 [1st Dept 2009] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Brown v Bellamy , 170 AD2d 876, 877-878 [3d Dept 1991], lv denied 78 NY2d 853 [1991]).

2023"Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation [w]here property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lienholder" ( US Bank, N.A. v Juliano , 184 AD3d 597, 599 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Filan v Dellaria , 144 AD3d 967, 972 ).

2023"Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation [w]here property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lienholder" ( US Bank, N.A. v Juliano , 184 AD3d 597, 599 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Filan v Dellaria , 144 AD3d 967, 972 ).

2023"Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation [w]here property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lienholder" ( US Bank, N.A. v Juliano , 184 AD3d 597, 599 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Filan v Dellaria , 144 AD3d 967, 972 ).

2023"Under the doctrine of equitable subrogation [w]here property of one person is used in discharging an obligation owed by another or a lien upon the property of another, under such circumstances that the other would be unjustly enriched by the retention of the benefit thus conferred, the former is entitled to be subrogated to the position of the obligee or lienholder" ( US Bank, N.A. v Juliano , 184 AD3d 597, 599 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Filan v Dellaria , 144 AD3d 967, 972 ).

2020"Under the relation back doctrine, an otherwise untimely claim in an amended pleading will be deemed interposed at the time of the original pleading unless the original pleading does not give notice of the transactions, occurrences, or series of transactions or occurrences, to be proved pursuant to the amended pleading" ( Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of N.Y. v JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. , 80 AD3d 1129, 1130 [2011] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]).