Aames Funding Corporation v. Houston
| Decision Date | 09 October 2007 |
| Docket Number | 2006-08953.,2007-08894. |
| Citation | 2007 NY Slip Op 07642,44 A.D.3d 692,843 N.Y.S.2d 660 |
| Parties | AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION, Respondent, v. LEONARD W. HOUSTON et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.
The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248 [1976]). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).
"[I]n an action to foreclose a mortgage, a plaintiff establishes its case as a matter of law through the production of the mortgage, the unpaid note, and evidence of default" (Republic Natl. Bank of N.Y. v O'Kane, 308 AD2d 482, 482 [2003]; see Village Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, 196 AD2d 812 [1993]). The plaintiff produced the note and mortgage executed by the defendant Leonard W. Houston (hereinafter Houston) as well as evidence of Houston's nonpayment. Accordingly, it was incumbent upon Houston and the defendant Lucille Houston (hereinafter the defendants), who holds title to the subject premises with Houston, to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of their defenses (see State Bank of Albany v Fioravanti, 51 NY2d 638, 647 [1980]; Federal Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v Karastathis, 237 AD2d 558 [1997]; Village Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, 196 AD2d 812 [1993]). The defendants failed to do so. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and its subsequent motion for a judgment of foreclosure and sale.
The defendants' remaining contentions are without...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
PennyMac, Corp. v. Darren DiPrima
...Dept.2009] ; J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Agnello, 62 A.D.3d 662, 878 N.Y.S.2d 397 [2d Dept.2009] ; Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston, 44 A.D.3d 692, 843 N.Y.S.2d 660 [2d Dept.2007] ). Notably, affirmative defenses predicated upon legal conclusions that are not substantiated with allegation......
-
Bank of N.Y. v. Morga
...[2d Dept.2009] ; J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA v. Agnello, 62 A.D.3d 662, 878 N.Y.S.2d 397 [2d Dept.2009] ; Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston, 44 A.D.3d 692, 843 N.Y.S.2d 660 [2d Dept.2007] ). Notably, affirmative defenses predicated upon legal conclusions that are not substantiated with allegati......
-
JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Rosa, 2016–04625
...104 A.D.3d 839, 961 N.Y.S.2d 535 ; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Webster, 61 A.D.3d 856, 877 N.Y.S.2d 200 ; Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston, 44 A.D.3d 692, 693, 843 N.Y.S.2d 660 ; Republic Natl. Bank of N.Y. v. O'Kane, 308 A.D.2d 482, 764 N.Y.S.2d 635 ), "such as waiver, estoppel, bad faith, fra......
-
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Muskopf
...[2d Dept 2010] ; Wells Fargo Bank v. Karla, 71 AD3d 1006, 896 N.Y.S.2d 681 [2d Dept 2010] ; Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston, 44 AD3d 692, 843 N.Y.S.2d 660 [2d Dept 2007] ). Notably, self-serving and conclusory allegations do not raise issues of fact and do not require plaintiff to respond to......