
    Martin v. Stoddard et al.
    
    
      (City Court of Brooklyn, General Term.
    
    January 28, 1889.)
    Mortgages—Taxation—Sale—Notice to Mortgagee.
    Under Laws N. Y. 1883, c. 114, § 4, i-equiring notice of the sale of land for taxes in the city of Brooklyn to be given to the owner and mortgagee of the property before a deed shall be made to the purchaser, a former owner who has been so served cannot, in ejectment by the purchaser, defend on the ground that no notice was given to a mortgagee.
    Appeal from trial term.
    Ejectment by Thomas Martin against Lucy E. Stoddard and Mary Mulvahill for a lot in the city of Brooklyn. The defendant Lucy E. Stoddard was seised of the land, her co-defendant being her tenant, and on March 18, 1885, Matthias W. Cole, the registrar of arrears, sold it to plaintiff for unpaid taxes,' assessments, and water-rates, and conveyed it to him by deed dated April 29, 1886. A mortgage executed by a former owner of the land, dated in 1837, duly recorded, was also introduced in evidence, and was not shown to be satisfied. A notice was proved to have been given to the defendant Mrs. Stoddard, setting forth the sale and purchase by plaintiff, but none appeared to have been given to the mortgagee. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Laws N. Y. 1883, c. 114, § 4, regulating the collection of taxes, assessments, and water-rates in the city of Brooklyn, provide that the registrar of arrears shall not deliver a deed to the purchaser unless the latter presents proof of the service of notice of such sale upon the owner and mortgagee of the premises.
    
      A. H. & W. E. Osborn, for appellants. Wm. J. Gfaynor, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

All the questions presented by the records in this ease have already been passed upon by this court, except the point that the notice of sale was not served upon the mortgagee of the lands sold for taxes. Laws 1883. c. 114, § 4, requires notice of sale to be served on the owners and mortgagee of the premises. Notice was served on the defendants, who were the owners. They cannot complain that the mortgagee was not served. Judgment must be affirmed, with costs.  