CitiBank, N.A. v. Van Brunt Props., LLC
| Citation | 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 03974,95 A.D.3d 1158,945 N.Y.S.2d 330 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Decision Date | 23 May 2012 |
| Parties | CITIBANK, N.A., appellant, v. VAN BRUNT PROPERTIES, LLC, respondent, et al., defendants. |
95 A.D.3d 1158
945 N.Y.S.2d 330
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 03974
CITIBANK, N.A., appellant,
v.
VAN BRUNT PROPERTIES, LLC, respondent, et al., defendants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 23, 2012.
Sills Cummis & Gross, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Stuart J. Glick, James M. Hirschhorn, and Jason L. Jurkevich of counsel), for appellant.
The Tzanides Law Firm, PLLC, New York, N.Y. (Kirk P. Tzanides of counsel), for respondent.
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, RANDALL T. ENG, and JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, JJ.
[945 N.Y.S.2d 331]
[95 A.D.3d 1158]In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lewis, J.), dated March 4, 2011, which denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint, its application for the appointment of a receiver, and its separate motion to substitute Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as the plaintiff, and to amend the caption accordingly, and granted the cross motion of the defendant Van Brunt Properties, LLC, for a judgment declaring that the plaintiff is not entitled to any interest, penalties, or fees on the subject note to the extent of declaring that the plaintiff is not entitled to any interest, penalties, or fees on the subject note from the date of the alleged default through March 31, 2011.
ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal from so much of the order as denied the plaintiff's application for the appointment of a receiver is deemed an application for leave to appeal from that portion of the order, and leave to appeal is granted ( seeCPLR 5701[c] ); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint, the plaintiff's application for the appointment of a receiver, and the plaintiff's separate motion to substitute Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as the plaintiff, and to amend [95 A.D.3d 1159]the caption accordingly, are granted, and the cross motion of the defendant Van Brunt Properties, LLC, for a judgment declaring that the plaintiff is not entitled to any interest, penalties, or fees on the subject note is denied.
The Supreme Court erred in denying that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint and the plaintiff's application for the appointment of a receiver. A mortgagee establishes its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment in a foreclosure action...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
MTGLQ Inv'rs v. Gross
...793, 793, 946 N.Y.S.2d 611; GRP Loan, LLC v. Taylor, 95 A.D.3d 1172, 1173, 945 N.Y.S.2d 336; Citibank, N.A. v. Van Brunt Props., LLC, 95 A.D.3d 1158, 1159, 945 N.Y.S.2d 330). Plaintiff has also established compliance with the default notice provision of the Mortgage as well as the notice re......
-
Bank of Am. v. Candy Maeder, PNC Bank, Nat'l Ass'n, 060078/2013.
...Assoc., LLC v. Garcia Group Enter., 96 AD3d 793, 946 N.Y.S.2d 611 [2d Dept 2012] ; Citibank, N.A. v. Van Brunt Prop., LLC, 95 AD3d 1158, 945 N.Y.S.2d 330 [2d Dept 2012] ; HSBC Bank v. Shwartz, 88 AD3d 961, 931 N.Y.S.2d 528 [2d Dept 2011] ). This standard is, however, enlarged to include a d......
-
Valley Nat'l Bank v. 58 Vlimp, LLC
...Assoc., LLC v. Garcia Group Enter., 96 AD3d 793, 946 N.Y.S.2d 611 [2d Dept 2012]; Citibank, N.A. v. Van Brunt Prop., LLC, 95 AD3d 1158, 945 N.Y.S.2d 330 [2d Dept 2012]; HSBC Bank v. Shwartz, 88 AD3d 961, 931 N.Y.S.2d 528 [2d Dept 2011]; US Bank N.A. v. Eaddy, 79 AD3d 1022, 1022, 914 N.Y.S.2......
-
HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n v. McKenna
...after a judgment had already been rendered in the plaintiff's favor.” ( Id.;see also Citibank, N.A. v. Van Brunt Props., LLC, 95 A.D.3d 1158, 1159, 945 N.Y.S.2d 330 [2d Dept.2012] ). Although judicial modification of the terms of the loan or mortgage may not be an appropriate remedy for a p......