Opinion · Nylaw New York

MATTER OF CITY OF NEW YORK, 254 App. Div. 706 (1938)

In the Matter of Application of THE CITY OF N.Y. Relative toAcquiring Title to the Real Prop. Required for Widening & Extending ofQueens Boulevard from Hoffman Boulevard to Horace Harding Drive, in theBorough of Queens, Affecting Damage Parcels Nos. 21, 22 & 23.FREDERICK R. CRANE & Others, Trs. for Series Q-1, etc., & LOUIS H.PINK, Superintendent of Ins. of the State of N.Y., as Liquidator ofNEW Y

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1938-04-22
Topic: general

MATTER OF CITY OF NEW YORK, 254 App. Div. 706 (1938) In the Matter of the Application of THE CITY OF NEW YORK Relative toAcquiring Title to the Real Property Required for Widening and Extending ofQueens Boulevard from Hoffman Boulevard to Horace Harding Drive, in theBorough of Queens, Affecting Damage Parcels Nos. 21, 22 and 23.FREDERICK R. CRANE and Others, Trustees for Series Q-1, etc., and LOUIS H.PINK, Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, as Liquidator ofNEW YORK TITLE AND MORTGAGE COMPANY, Respondents; HENRY C. FREY,Attorney-Appellant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. April 22, 1938.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed MATTER OF CITY OF NEW YORK, 254 App. Div. 706 (1938). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

MATTER OF CITY OF NEW YORK,254 App. Div. 706(1938)

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-1, 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 New York, Second Department.

April 22, 1938.

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 award. (Gatesv.De La Mare,142 N.Y. 307.) Lazansky, P.J., Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.