|
 |
||||||
 |
|||||||
Close is good in horseshoes and hand grenades but not when it comes to perfecting a judgment lien. In New York, judgments are docketed against a debtor’s name while deeds and mortgages are recorded against real property. Black’s Law Dictionary defines the term “Idem Sonans” as “sounding the same or alike; Having the same sound.” The dictionary further explains that the doctrine of “Idem Sonans” states that absolute accuracy in spelling names is not required in a legal document. The test would be whether the variation in the spelling is such that it would mislead the opposite party to his prejudice. This common law doctrine would put great pressure on entities such as title companies and individuals responsible for researching liens and encumbrances on real property, to be sure to expand their searches so as to be able to identify judgments against individuals even though the spelling of the name is not exactly identical in the judgment as in deed. The doctrine would protect judgment creditors when, if given incorrect spellings, perfected a judgment in a debtors name which was spelled differently from a spelling on a deed. However, a recent court decision is now being utilized by title insurance companies to herald the death of the doctrine of “Idem Sonans”. The decision of Justice Gammerman of the Supreme Court, New York County in Big Fur vs. Gross (New York Law Journal 8/12/98 page 23 column 5) specifically holds that the doctrine of “Idem Sonans” does not apply to the filings affecting real estate in New York, specifically a deed and a judgment. This decision has been interpreted to mean that if the spelling of the debtors name is not “exactly” the same as the spelling on the deed, the judgment lien is not valid. The court cites Grygorewicz vs. Domestic and Foreign Discount Corp.. 179 Misc. 1017 (Supreme Court Kings County 1943) to put the pressure on the “creditor” who should see to it that the docketing is in the correct name of the debtor. The case before the Supreme Court, New York County made the distinction between a judgment entered against a debtor with the last name Drizin and who held real property under the last name Drizen. The court cited a 1926 decision of the Supreme Court, Erie County where the judgment was entered against the last name Wiesner and the real property was under the last name of Weinser. The emphasis the court places on the responsibility of the judgment creditor can not be overlooked. Under the court rationale of Big Fur unless the creditor, at every step insures that the accurate information is in fact utilized to docket a judgment and create a lien against real property all errors will be done to the detriment of the creditor, regardless of who makes them. The message and trend in this electronic era is clear. The burden is on the Creditor or Attorney to do the homework necessary to spell the judgment debtor’s name correctly to insure a good lien on real property. |