Alliance Funding Co. v Taboada

Alliance Funding Co. v Taboada 2007 NY Slip Op 03638 [39 AD3d 784] April 24, 2007 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Alliance Funding Company, Respondent,
v
Svetlana Taboada et al., Defendants, and New Jersey Mortgage and Investment Corp., Appellant.

—[*1] Wingate, Kearney & Cullen, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Richard J. Cea of counsel), for appellant.

Peter T. Roach, Jericho, N.Y. (Scott A. Koltun and Jacob Ginsburg of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant New Jersey Mortgage and Investment Corp. appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated October 26, 2005, which, after a nonjury trial, determined that the plaintiff's mortgage has priority over its mortgage.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

New York has a "race-notice" recording statutory scheme whereby the mortgage recorded first by a mortgagee without notice of any other mortgages will maintain priority over such other mortgages (see Real Property Law § 291; Roth v Porush, 281 AD2d 612, 614 [2001]; Goldstein v Gold, 106 AD2d 100, 101-102 [1984], affd 66 NY2d 624 [1985]). In applying this principle, the Supreme Court correctly determined that the plaintiff's mortgage recorded on September 13, 1999, has priority over the defendant's mortgage recorded on February 25, 2000.

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.P., Santucci, Krausman and Balkin, JJ., concur.