Case Name: VAN NAME v. QUEENS LAND & TITLE CO.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1910-04-29
Citations: 122 N.Y.S. 720
Docket Number: 
Parties: VAN NAME v. QUEENS LAND & TITLE CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 122
Pages: 720–720

Head Matter:
VAN NAME v. QUEENS LAND & TITLE CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
April 29, 1910.)
Judicial Sales (§ 28 )—Enforcement of Bid.
Though it be conceded, in a proceeding to compel the purchaser at a judicial sale to take title, that the proper course was to order a new sale, such an order cannot be made therein; but motion therefor" must be made in the action in which the sale was made.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Judicial Sales, Cent. Dig. § 55; Dec. Dig. § 28. ]
Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
Action by William H. Van Name against the Queens Land & Title Company. From an order denying his motion to compel the assignee of the purchaser at a judicial sale to complete the purchase, said Van Name appeals.
Affirmed.
See, also, 130 App. Div. 857, 115 N. Y. Supp. 905.
• Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J„ and CLARICE, SCOTT, Mc-LAUGHLIN, and DOWLING, JJ.
Charles Goldzier, for appellant.
Richard T. Greene, for respondent.
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
PER CURIÁM.
Although it was conceded upon the argument that the proper course to pursue was to order a resale, instead of proceeding at once against the purchasers to take title, such an order cannot be made in this kind of a proceeding. A motion to that effect should be made in the action in which the sale was ordered.
- The order, therefore, is affirmed, without costs to either party, without prejudice to a motion in the action for a resale.