Emigrant Bank v. Drimmer [& Sternberg]
New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
171 A.D.3d 1132, 99 N.Y.S.3d 79 (2019)
Facts
Levi Drimmer (defendant) purchased real property, which was financed by a mortgage held by Emigrant Mortgage Company, Incorporated (Emigrant). Emigrant was the predecessor-in-interest to Emigrant Bank (plaintiff). In 2002, before Emigrant’s interest in the mortgage was recorded, Drimmer sold the property to Yosef Sternberg (defendant). Sternberg’s title report did not show Emigrant’s mortgage. After Drimmer’s sale to Sternberg, Drimmer continued to make monthly payments on the mortgage. These payments made by Drimmer included real estate tax payments escrowed by Emigrant (meaning Emigrant held money in escrow used for tax payments, and the payments were recorded in the tax records as being made by Emigrant). After Emigrant learned of Drimmer’s sale to Sternberg, Emigrant accelerated the loan, demanded payment of the full balance, and stopped accepting monthly payments. After taking over Emigrant’s interest in the mortgage, Emigrant Bank sued Drimmer and Sternberg to foreclose the mortgage. Sternberg moved for summary judgment, which was granted. The trial court found that Sternberg was a good-faither purchaser for value, so he had taken the property free of Emigrant’s mortgage. Emigrant Bank appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 707,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
