Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. NA v. Sachar
| Decision Date | 22 May 2012 |
| Citation | 943 N.Y.S.2d 893,95 A.D.3d 695,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 03964 |
| Parties | BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY NA, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Eddie SACHAR, Defendant–Appellant,New York City Environmental Control Board, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Christopher Thompson, West Islip, for appellant.
Hogan Lovells US, LLP, New York (Chava Brandriss of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered on or about March 11, 2011, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on its complaint as against defendant Sachar, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff proved its standing to commence this foreclosure action by demonstrating that it was both the holder or assignee of the subject mortgage and the holder or assignee of the underlying note at the time the action was commenced ( see U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Collymore, 68 A.D.3d 752, 890 N.Y.S.2d 578 [2009] ). Defendant is correct that, although Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) validly assigned the mortgage to plaintiff, and the assignment was properly recorded in the public records, MERS had not been given any interest in the underlying note by the lender ( see Bank of N.Y. v. Silverberg, 86 A.D.3d 274, 283, 926 N.Y.S.2d 532 [2011] ). However, the complaint and the documents annexed to plaintiff's motion establish that an assignment of the note had been effectuated by physical delivery of the note before this action was commenced ( see id. at 280, 926 N.Y.S.2d 532; Collymore, 68 A.D.3d at 754, 890 N.Y.S.2d 578).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
FTBK Investor II LLC v. Genesis Holding LLC
...2014) ; OneWest Bank FSB v. Carey, 104 A.D.3d 444, 445, 960 N.Y.S.2d 306 (1st Dep't 2013) ; Bank of N.Y. Mellon Trust Co. NA v. Sachar, 95 A.D.3d 695, 696, 943 N.Y.S.2d 893 (1st Dep't 2012). Assignment of a note and mortgage may be by an executed writing or by their physical delivery. U.S. ......
-
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Holler
...Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Burke, 52 Misc.3d 944, 34 NYS3d 865 [Sup Ct, Suffolk County 2016] ; see also, Bank of N.Y. Mellon Trust Co. NA v. Sachar, 95 A.D.3d 695, 943 N.Y.S.2d 893 [2d Dept 2012] ; cf., Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Haller, 100 A.D.3d 680, 954 N.Y.S.2d 551 [2d Dept 2012] ). The......
-
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Muskopf
...825, 947 N.Y.S.2d 522 [2d Dept 2012] ; Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Am. v. Codio, 94 AD3d 1040,supra; Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. NA v. Sachar, 95 AD3d 695, 943 N.Y.S.2d 893 [1st Dept 2012] ).Holder status of a note and mortgage is established where the plaintiff possesses the mortgage not......
-
Barnett v. Countrywide Bank, FSB
...lender's nominee or mortgagee of record. Thus, in New York, assignments by MERS may be valid. Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. NA v. Sachar, 95 A.D.3d 695, 696, 943 N.Y.S.2d 893 (1st Dep't 2012) (“Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) validly assigned the mortgage to plaintiff”).T......