Case Name: Joan Cashin, Respondent, v. Susan Simek, Defendant. Island Properties & Associates, LLC, Nonparty Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2009-02-24
Citations: 59 A.D.3d 657
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joan Cashin, Respondent, v Susan Simek, Defendant. Island Properties & Associates, LLC, Nonparty Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 59
Pages: 657–659

Head Matter:
Joan Cashin, Respondent, v Susan Simek, Defendant. Island Properties & Associates, LLC, Nonparty Appellant.
[875 NYS2d 492]

Opinion:
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the nonparty Island Properties & Associates, LLC, as successful bidder at the foreclosure sale, appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Brands, J.), dated August 3, 2007, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs cross motion which was to compel it to reimburse the referee for real property taxes paid by the plaintiff in the sum of $61,524.95.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs payable to the respondent.
In this foreclosure action, the judgment of foreclosure and sale, the notice of sale, and the terms of sale each provided that the successful bidder would take the property subject to the payment by the successful bidder of any unpaid taxes, liens, or encumbrances. Island Properties & Associates, LLC (hereinafter Island Properties), as successful bidder at the foreclosure sale, refused to make those payments. It contends that, pursuant to RPAPL 1354 (2), those payments must be made out of the proceeds of the foreclosure sale.
By Laws of 1997 (ch 232), RPAPL 1354 (2) was amended to require that taxes, assessments, and water rates which are liens on the property be paid out of the proceeds of a mortgage foreclosure sale. Further, the amendment deleted the language "unless the judgment otherwise directs." The purpose of this amendment was to insure that municipalities were paid the amounts owed to them (1997 NY Legis Ann, at 144).
Nevertheless, it has repeatedly been held that the terms of the judgment of foreclosure and sale control (see Bank of N.Y. v Love, 3 AD3d 303 [2004]). Where, as here, the record demonstrates that the purchaser had notice that the property at issue was being sold subject to the payment by the purchaser of any unpaid taxes, liens, or encumbrances pursuant to the terms of the judgment of foreclosure and sale, the purchaser is bound by those provisions. "Having proceeded with the purchase under those terms, the [appellant] cannot now claim that the judgment of foreclosure and sale should be modified to eliminate that obligation" (Merrill Lynch Credit Corp. v Averell, 283 AD2d 618 [2001]; see Better Homes Depot v Kraut, 282 AD2d 637 [2001]; Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Nittoli, 250 AD2d 427 [1998]). By complying with the terms of the judgment, the statutory objective of insuring the municipality is paid is satisfied, since the bidder is required to pay outstanding taxes at the closing.
In the instant case, since Island Properties refused to close, the plaintiff paid the taxes to avoid forfeiture and the appellant must now make reimbursement. Since the terms of the judgment of foreclosure were clear, by proceeding with the sale, and not seeking vacatur of the sale, the appellant in effect waived any claim that the judgment should be modified to comply with RPAPL 1354 (2) (see Merrill Lynch Credit Corp. v Averell, 283 AD2d 618 [2001]; Better Homes Depot v Kraut, 282 AD2d 637 [2001]; Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Nittoli, 250 AD2d 427 [1998]). Fisher, J.P., Balkin and Chambers, JJ., concur.