Flagstar Bank v. Bellafiore
| Decision Date | 24 April 2012 |
| Citation | 943 N.Y.S.2d 551,94 A.D.3d 1044,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 03135 |
| Parties | FLAGSTAR BANK, appellant, v. Lauren BELLAFIORE, et al., defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates, P.C., Plainview, N.Y. (Edward Rugino of counsel), for appellant.MARK C. DILLON, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, L. PRISCILLA HALL, and LEONARD B. AUSTIN, JJ. In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated February 1, 2011, which denied its motion for summary judgment on the complaint, to strike the answer of the defendant Lauren Bellafiore, for an order of reference, and for leave to amend the caption to delete the defendants sued herein as “John Does” and “Jane Does.”
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint, to strike the answer of the defendant Lauren Bellafiore, for an order of reference, and for leave to amend the caption to delete the defendants sued herein as “John Does” and “Jane Does” is granted.
The Supreme Court improperly denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint, to strike the answer of the defendant Lauren Bellafiore, for an order of reference, and for leave to amend the caption to delete the defendants sued herein as “John Does” and “Jane Does” on the ground that the plaintiff had not filed an attorney affirmation in accordance with Administrative Order 548/10, which was issued by the Chief Administrative Judge of the State of New York on October 20, 2010. Administrative Order 548/10 (hereinafter the Administrative Order), which has since been replaced by Administrative Order 431/11, requires the plaintiff's counsel in a residential mortgage foreclosure action to file with the court an affirmation confirming the accuracy of the plaintiff's pleadings. In cases pending on the effective date of the Administrative Order, where no judgment of foreclosure has been entered, the attorney affirmation is required to be filed at the time of filing of either the proposed order of reference or the proposed judgment of foreclosure ( see Administrative Order 548/10, replaced by Administrative Order 431/11).
This mortgage foreclosure action was pending at the time of the effective date of the Administrative Order, and the plaintiff filed its motion, which included a proposed order of reference, approximately five months before the Administrative Order was issued. Thus, the plaintiff could not have filed the attorney affirmation pursuant to the Administrative Order when it filed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
PennyMac, Corp. v. Darren DiPrima
...or in support of the affirmative defenses asserted in their answer or otherwise available to them (see Flagstar Bank v. Bellafiore, 94 A.D.3d 1044, 943 N.Y.S.2d 551 [2d Dept.2012] ; Grogg Assocs. v. South Rd. Assocs., 74 A.D.3d 1021, 907 N.Y.S.2d 22 [2d Dept.2010] ; Wells Fargo Bank v. Karl......
-
Bank of N.Y. v. Morga
...or in support of the affirmative defenses asserted in her answer or otherwise available to her (see Flagstar Bank v. Bellafiore, 94 A.D.3d 1044, 943 N.Y.S.2d 551 [2d Dept.2012] ; Grogg Assocs. v. South Rd. Assocs., 74 A.D.3d 1021, 907 N.Y.S.2d 22 [2d Dept.2010] ; Wells Fargo Bank v. Karla, ......
-
Carver Fed. Sav. Bank v. Redeemed Christian Church of God, Int'l Chapel, HHH Parish, Long Island, N.Y., Inc.
...and a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on its complaint against the defendants ( see Flagstar Bank v. Bellafiore, 94 A.D.3d 1044, 943 N.Y.S.2d 551, 94 A.D.3d 1044 [2d Dept 2012] ). The plaintiff's moving papers also established its entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the t......
-
Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v. Arthur
...N.Y.S.2d 130 [2d Dept 2014] ; PHH Mtge. Corp. v. Davis, 111 AD3d 1110, 975 N.Y.S.2d 480 [3d Dept 2013] ; Flagstar Bank v. Bellafiore, 94 AD3d 1044, 943 N.Y.S.2d 551 [2d Dept 2012] ; Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of N.Y. City, Inc. v. Meltzer, 67 AD3d 872, 889 N.Y.S.2d 627 [2d Dept 2009] ). By i......