CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Stosel

Decision Date15 November 2011
Citation2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 08319,934 N.Y.S.2d 182,89 A.D.3d 887
PartiesCITIMORTGAGE, INC., respondent, v. Usher STOSEL, appellant, et al., defendants.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 08319
89 A.D.3d 887
934 N.Y.S.2d 182

CITIMORTGAGE, INC., respondent,
v.
Usher STOSEL, appellant, et al., defendants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Nov. 15, 2011.


[934 N.Y.S.2d 182]

Sanford Solny, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

Katz & Rychik, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Bennett R. Katz of counsel), for respondent.

MARK C. DILLON, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, RANDALL T. ENG, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.

[89 A.D.3d 887] In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Usher [89 A.D.3d 888] Stosel appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Velasquez, J.), dated April 12, 2010, as granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against him and for an order of reference, and, in effect, denied that branch of his cross motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him for lack of standing.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, those branches of the plaintiff's motion

[934 N.Y.S.2d 183]

which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Usher Stosel and for an order of reference are denied, and that branch of the cross motion of the defendant Usher Stosel which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him for lack of standing is granted.

Where, as here, a plaintiff's standing to commence a foreclosure action is placed in issue by the defendant, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to prove its standing to be entitled to relief ( see U.S. Bank N.A. v. Madero, 80 A.D.3d 751, 752, 915 N.Y.S.2d 612; U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Collymore, 68 A.D.3d 752, 753, 890 N.Y.S.2d 578). A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by demonstrating that it is both the holder or assignee of the subject mortgage and the holder or assignee of the underlying note, “either by physical delivery or execution of a written assignment prior to the commencement of the action” ( Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Weisblum, 85 A.D.3d 95, 108, 923 N.Y.S.2d 609). Moreover, “an assignment of the mortgage without assignment of the underlying note or bond is a nullity” ( U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Collymore, 68 A.D.3d at 754, 890 N.Y.S.2d 578; see Bank of N.Y. v. Silverberg, 86 A.D.3d 274, 280, 926 N.Y.S.2d 532).

Contrary to the determination of the Supreme Court, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that it...

To continue reading

Request your trial
36 cases
  • Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Torres
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • September 26, 2014
    ...Dept 2013] ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Rivas, 95 A.D.3d 1061, 945 N.Y.S.2d 328 [2d Dept 2012] ; Citimortgage, Inc. v. Stosel, 89 A.D.3d 887, 888, 934 N.Y.S.2d 182 [2d Dept 2011] ; U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Adrian Collymore, 68 A.D.3d 752, 890 N.Y.S.2d 578 [2d Dept 2009] ; Wells Fargo Bank M......
  • Midfirst Bank v. Agho
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • August 13, 2014
    ...judgment must also provide evidence that it received both the mortgage and note by a proper assignment ( see Citimortgage, Inc. v. Stosel, 89 A.D.3d 887, 888, 934 N.Y.S.2d 182; CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Rosenthal, 88 A.D.3d 759, 761, 931 N.Y.S.2d 638; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Barnett, 8......
  • FTBK Investor II LLC v. Genesis Holding LLC
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • August 19, 2014
    ...physical delivery. U.S. Bank N.A. v. Dellarmo, 94 A.D.3d 746, 748, 942 N.Y.S.2d 122 (2d Dep't 2012) ; Citimortgage, Inc. v. Stosel, 89 A.D.3d 887, 888, 934 N.Y.S.2d 182 (2d Dep't 2011) ; Bank of N.Y. v. Silverberg, 86 A.D.3d 274, 280–81, 926 N.Y.S.2d 532 (2d Dep't 2011) ; Aurora Loan Servs.......
  • BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP v. Bertram
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • January 7, 2016
    ...Dept.2013] ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Rivas, 95 A.D.3d 1061, 945 N.Y.S.2d 328 [2d Dept.2012] ; Citimortgage, Inc. v. Stosel, 89 A.D.3d 887, 888, 934 N.Y.S.2d 182 [2d Dept. 2011] ; Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v. Mastropaolo, 42 A.D.3d 239, 837 N.Y.S.2d 247 [2d Dept.2007] ). The last......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT