Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Ramirez
| Decision Date | 07 May 2014 |
| Citation | 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 03228,985 N.Y.S.2d 616,117 A.D.3d 674 |
| Parties | DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, etc., appellant, v. Luz Estela RAMIREZ, also known as Luz E. Ramirez, respondent, et al., defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Hogan Lovells U.S. LLP, New York, N.Y. (Chava Brandriss, David Dunn, and Robin L. Muir of counsel), for appellant.
Scott A. Rosenberg, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Linda Holmes, Oda Friedheim, and Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP [David J. Abrams and Jennifer McDougall], of counsel), for respondent.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, and SHERI S. ROMAN, JJ.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), entered August 21, 2012, which granted the motion of the defendant Luz Estela Ramirez, also known as Luz E. Ramirez, to reargue her motion to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale, entered upon her default in answering or appearing, which had previously been denied in an order entered January 31, 2012, and, upon reargument, vacated the determination in the order entered January 31, 2012, denying her motion to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale, and thereupon granted the motion.
ORDERED that the order entered August 21, 2012, is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof, upon reargument, vacating the determination in the order entered January 31, 2012, denying the motion of the defendant Luz Estela Ramirez, also known as Luz E. Ramirez, to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale and thereupon granting the motion, and substituting therefor a provision, upon reargument, adhering to the original determination in the order entered January 31, 2012, denying the motion of the defendant Luz Estela Ramirez, also known as Luz E. Ramirez, to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and sale; as so modified, the order entered August 21, 2012, is affirmed, with costs to the appellant.
A motion for reargument must be “based upon matters of fact or law allegedly overlooked or misapprehended by the court in determining the prior motion, but shall not include any matters of fact not offered on the prior motion” (CPLR 2221[d][2] ). Such motions are addressed to the sound discretion of the Supreme Court ( see HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Halls, 98 A.D.3d 718, 950 N.Y.S.2d 172;Matter of American Alternative Ins. Corp. v. Pelszynski, 85 A.D.3d 1157, 1158, 926 N.Y.S.2d 640). Here, the Supreme...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boyce v. Citibank, N.A. (In re Boyce)
...Eugene Di Lorenzo, Inc. v A.C. Dutton Lbr. Co., 67 N.Y.2d 138, 141; EMC Mtge. Corp. v Lamb, 126 A.D.3d 669, 669; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Ramirez, 117 A.D.3d 674, 675). The defendants failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for their default. In the absence of a reasonable excuse, ......
-
Lasalle Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Calle
...action (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1] ; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Hampton, 119 A.D.3d 856, 989 N.Y.S.2d 368 ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Ramirez, 117 A.D.3d 674, 675, 985 N.Y.S.2d 616 ; Wells Fargo Bank v. Malave, 107 A.D.3d 880, 968 N.Y.S.2d 127 ; U.S. Bank N.A. v. Stewart, 97 A.D.3d 740, 94......
-
Wells Fargo Bank v. Arratia
... ... v Calle, 153 A.D.3d ... 801, 802; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Ramirez, ... 117 A.D.3d 674, 675). "'The ... ...
-
Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc'y, FSB v. Rodriguez
...defense to the action (see LaSalle Bank N.A. v. Calle, 153 A.D.3d 801, 802, 61 N.Y.S.3d 104 ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Ramirez, 117 A.D.3d 674, 675, 985 N.Y.S.2d 616 ). Law office failure may be accepted as a reasonable excuse in the exercise of the court's sound discretion (see Ban......