Eastern Savings Bank, FSB v. Thompson, 112415 FED2, 14-4520-cv
|Party Name:||EASTERN SAVINGS BANK, FSB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EBONY THOMPSON, KATRINA BREEDY, NEW YORK CITY PARKING VIOLATIONS BUREAU, NEW YORK ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD, Defendants-Appellees, JOHN DOE, #1-5, JOHN DOE, #6, the last six names being fictitious and unknown to plaintiff, the persons or parties intended being the tenants, occupants, persons or c|
|Attorney:||APPEARING FOR APPELLANT: DWIGHT YELLEN (Jerold Feuerstein and Michelle Mandelstein, on the brief), Kriss & Feuerstein LLP, New York, New York. APPEARING FOR APPELLEES: STEVEN ALEXANDER BIOLSI, Biolsi Law Group P.C., New York, New York.|
|Judge Panel:||PRESENT: CHESTER J. STRAUB, REENA RAGGI, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||November 24, 2015|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT'S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION "SUMMARY ORDER"). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 24th day of November, two thousand fifteen.
Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (William F. Kuntz, II, Judge).
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment entered on November 5, 2014, is VACATED and REMANDED.
In this foreclosure action, plaintiff Eastern Savings Bank, FSB ("Eastern") appeals from the denial of its motion for summary judgment and the award of summary judgment to defendants based on Eastern's failure to demonstrate standing. See Eastern Savings Bank, FSB v. Thompson, 57 F.Supp.3d 198 (E.D.N.Y. 2014). Eastern submits that its physical possession of the defaulted promissory note, indorsed in blank, at the time it commenced this action was sufficient to establish its standing, and that the district court erred in requiring it to make a further showing of the note's and the mortgage's chain of custody through evidence of their physical delivery from Home123 Corporation ("Home123"), the original note holder, to servicing agency GMAC Mortgage, LLC ("GMAC"). Though the record is unclear, either Home123 or GMAC is alleged to have later transferred the note to another entity, UBS Real Estate Securities, Inc. ("UBS"), that, in turn, delivered the note to Eastern. We review the district court's disposition of the cross-motions for summary judgment de novo, examining each party's motion on its...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP