The original plaintiff was a trustee to a Wall Street investment fund. During the lawsuit, the plaintiff purportedly resigned as trustee and a successor trustee was appointed. There was finally a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, but it showed the name of the original plaintiff, not the successor trustee. This is obviously incorrect, but WHAT IS THE LEGAL EFFECT OF SUCH A JUDGMENT? Common sense says that there should have been a substitution of the successor trustee for the former trustee. Strangely, at the sheriff's sale the property was purchased by the FORMER trustee.