HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n v. Izzo, 2017–08533
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Citation | 109 N.Y.S.3d 886 (Mem),177 A.D.3d 648 |
| Docket Number | Index No. 35362/09,2017–08533 |
| Parties | HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., Appellant, v. Rose IZZO, et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. |
| Decision Date | 06 November 2019 |
177 A.D.3d 648
109 N.Y.S.3d 886 (Mem)
HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., Appellant,
v.
Rose IZZO, et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.
2017–08533
Index No. 35362/09
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Submitted—June 18, 2019
November 6, 2019
RAS Boriskin, LLC, Westbury, N.Y. (Joseph F. Battista of counsel), for appellant.
Young Law Group, PLLC, Bohemia, N.Y. (Ivan E. Young of counsel), for respondents.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, BETSY BARROS, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (C. Randall Hinrichs, J.), dated June 12, 2017. The order granted the motion of the defendants Rose Izzo and Anthony Izzo pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In September 2009, the plaintiff commenced this action to foreclose a mortgage against Rose Izzo and Anthony Izzo (hereinafter together the Izzos), among others. After the Izzos failed to timely appear or answer, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion for an order of reference. On March 30, 2011, the parties entered into a stipulation vacating the order of
reference and providing the Izzos with 30 days to interpose an answer. On April 27, 2011, the Izzos served an answer. In May 2012, the Izzos moved to amend their answer and to serve discovery demands, and the court granted the motion in an order dated March 7, 2013. The Izzos' amended answer with counterclaims and discovery demands were deemed served upon the plaintiff as of March 13, 2013.
In November 2015, the Izzos served the plaintiff with a notice and demand pursuant to CPLR 3216, demanding resumption of the prosecution of the action and the service and filing of a note of issue within 90 days of receipt of the notice and demand (hereinafter the 90–day notice). The plaintiff did not serve and file a note of issue and did not move to vacate the 90–day notice or to extend the 90–day period. In June 2016, the Izzos moved pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them. The Supreme...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rodriguez v. Diallo, 2019–0455
...to timely abide by the 90–day demand, and the existence of a potentially meritorious cause of action (see HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Izzo, 177 A.D.3d 648, 649, 109 N.Y.S.3d 886 ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Inga, 156 A.D.3d at 761, 67 N.Y.S.3d 264 ; Adbul v. Lopez, 111 A.D.3d 587, 588, 974......
-
E. Coast Mech. Contractors v. Fed. Mgmt., CV-003979-20/RI
...1261 (2d. Dep't. 2021) quoting Harcztark v. Drive Variety, Inc., 21 A.D.3d 876, 876-877 (2d. Dep't. 2005); HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Izzo, 177 A.D.3d 648, 649 (2d. Dep't. 2019). In assessing the reasonableness of the excuse. Courts must weigh all relevant factors, including the extent of the d......
-
People v. Cardona, 2017–12711
...he understood, the separate and distinct nature of the waiver of the right to appeal, and the defendant signed a written waiver which he 177 A.D.3d 648 discussed with counsel and which adequately supplemented the oral colloquy (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 9......
-
Pavilion Park Slope Cinemas 9, LLC v. Pro Century Corp., 2019-03321
...669, 107 N.Y.S.3d 695 ). Further, its claims of law office failure were conclusory and unsubstantiated (see HSBC Bank USA N.A. v. Izzo, 177 A.D.3d 648, 649, 109 N.Y.S.3d 886 ). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the motion of the defendant ProCen......
-
Rodriguez v. Diallo, 2019–0455
...to timely abide by the 90–day demand, and the existence of a potentially meritorious cause of action (see HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Izzo, 177 A.D.3d 648, 649, 109 N.Y.S.3d 886 ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Inga, 156 A.D.3d at 761, 67 N.Y.S.3d 264 ; Adbul v. Lopez, 111 A.D.3d 587, 588, 974......
-
E. Coast Mech. Contractors v. Fed. Mgmt., CV-003979-20/RI
...1261 (2d. Dep't. 2021) quoting Harcztark v. Drive Variety, Inc., 21 A.D.3d 876, 876-877 (2d. Dep't. 2005); HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Izzo, 177 A.D.3d 648, 649 (2d. Dep't. 2019). In assessing the reasonableness of the excuse. Courts must weigh all relevant factors, including the extent of the d......
-
People v. Cardona, 2017–12711
...he understood, the separate and distinct nature of the waiver of the right to appeal, and the defendant signed a written waiver which he 177 A.D.3d 648 discussed with counsel and which adequately supplemented the oral colloquy (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 9......
-
Pavilion Park Slope Cinemas 9, LLC v. Pro Century Corp., 2019-03321
...669, 107 N.Y.S.3d 695 ). Further, its claims of law office failure were conclusory and unsubstantiated (see HSBC Bank USA N.A. v. Izzo, 177 A.D.3d 648, 649, 109 N.Y.S.3d 886 ). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the motion of the defendant ProCen......