The motion court correctly held that even if it were to declare that plaintiffs' adverse possession of the building and its units had given them title thereto by the time defendant City purported to transfer title to defendant UHAB, the mortgage on the building delivered by UHAB to NCB is nonetheless valid under Real Property Law § 260. We reject plaintiff's argument that since the validity of a conveyance of real property depends on the validity of title held by the...
Let's get started

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.