In re City of New York, 254 A.D. 706 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938). · Go Syfert
Search
In re City of New York, 254 A.D. 706 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
58 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Kurland Group ex rel. Estate of Ramirez v. FNBN I, LLC (In re Ramirez) (nysb, 2015-03-27)
Treatment trajectory · 1939 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1939 1982 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kurland Group ex rel. Estate of Ramirez v. FNBN I, LLC (In re Ramirez)
Bankr. S.D.N.Y. · 2015 · confidence medium
United States v. Certain Lands in Town of High lands, N.Y., 49 F.Supp. 962, 968 (S.D.N.Y. 1943) (“An attorney’s lien does not take precedence over liens already encumbering the property.”); Gates v. De La Mare, 142 N.Y. 307 , 37 N.E. 121, 123 (1894) (holding that an attorney’s charging lien in a condemnation award was subordinate to prior mortgage on the condemned property); In re Queens Blvd., City of New York, 254 A.D. 706 , 3 N.Y.S.2d 775, 776 (1938) (same); In re New Utrecht Ave. in City of New York, 185 A.D. 55 , 172 N.Y.S. 586 (1918) (same).
In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York Relative to Acquiring Title to the Real Property Required for Widening and Extending of Queens Boulevard from Hoffman Boulevard to Horace Harding Drive, in the Borough of Queens, Affecting Damage Parcels Nos. 21, 22 and 23. Frederick R. Crane and Others, Trustees for Series Q-l, etc., and Louis H. Pink, Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, as Liquidator of New York Title and Mortgage Company, Respondents Henry C. Frey, Attorney-Appellant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Apr 22, 1938.
254 A.D. 706
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

On appeal by the attorney for the former owners of property taken in condemnation, from an order directing the payment of the award to the trustees holding one mortgage and to the liquidator of a title company owning the other, without provision for payment of compensation claimed by the appellant from the title company on the theory that he had a lien for services which was superior to the interests of that mortgagee, here respondent, order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The appeal was in effect withdrawn by the appellant as to the mortgage trustees. Appellant presented no facts from which it could be inferred that the title company, mortgagee, retained the appellant as its attorney in the proceeding. Appellant has no rights in the awaj’d. (Gates v. De La Mare, 142 N. Y. 307.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.