Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc. v. Kontogiannis 22 N.Y.3d 960

← Cases

DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc. v. Kontogiannis

22 N.Y.3d 960 Court N.Y. Decision date 2013-11-14 English

Judges Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.

Contents

Majority

p. 960
[999 NE2d 1189, 977 NYS2d 744]
DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc., Appellant, v Thomas Kontogiannis et al., Defendants, and Chicago Title Insurance Company, Inc., et al., Respondents.
Decided November 14, 2013
p. 961
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Hahn & Hessen LLP, New York City (John P. Amato, Robert J. Malatak and Annie Power of counsel), for appellant.
Herrick, Feinstein LLP, New York City (Arthur G. Jakoby and Adam J. Stein of counsel), for Chicago Title Insurance Company, Inc., respondent.
DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, White Plains CMichael J. Schwarz and Lee S. Wiederkehr of counsel), for United General Title Insurance Co., Inc., respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative. As a matter of law, DLJ, as a third-party purchaser of mortgages on the secondary mortgage market, cannot rely on pre-closing documents to establish that a proper conveyance and recording of the underlying property occurred or that title insurance for the property was issued (see Citibank v Chicago Tit. Ins. Co., 214 AD2d 212 , 219 [1st Dept 1995], Iv dismissed 87 NY2d 896 [1995]). The Appellate Division correctly determined that any such reliance was unjustifiable.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative, in a memorandum.

Cases cited