Hypo Holdings, Inc. v. Feuer
| Citation | 888 N.Y.S.2d 904,2009 NY Slip Op 8998,68 A.D.3d 722 |
| Decision Date | 01 December 2009 |
| Docket Number | 2008-09624 |
| Parties | HYPO HOLDINGS, INC., Appellant, v. HERBERT F. FEUER et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly rejected the referee's report, as it was based upon inadmissible hearsay evidence. Although the plaintiff sufficiently explained the unavailability of the original documents relating to the defendants' mortgage and note, it failed to produce competent "secondary evidence" that did not offend any other exclusionary rule or policy (Schozer v William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 84 NY2d 639, 643-645 [1994]). Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the verified complaint was not admissible as a past recollection recorded, as it was drafted by outside counsel and based solely upon facts contained in a computer database of the nonparty bank that issued the subject mortgage (see Matter of Phoenix Ins. Co. v Golanek, 50 AD3d 1148, 1151 [2008]; Curran v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 262 AD2d 521 [1999]; People v Ramirez, 112 AD2d 326, 326-327 [1985]). Additionally, a nonparty witness's testimony was insufficient to establish the contents of the missing documents, as that witness was unable to accurately recount or recite, from personal knowledge, the contents of the documents (see Schozer v William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 84 NY2d at 645-646).
The plaintiff's remaining contention is without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Durane-Bolivard, 2018–05250
...defendant correctly contends, Robertson's assertions in that regard constituted inadmissible hearsay (see Hypo Holdings, Inc. v. Feuer, 68 A.D.3d 722, 722, 888 N.Y.S.2d 904 ), since the records themselves were not provided to the referee (see Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Gordon, 171 A.D.3d 197, 2......
-
Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Hollien
...340 [3d Dept 1993]). 3 Harris's assertions as to the amounts due constituted inadmissible hearsay (see Hypo Holdings, Inc. v. Feuer, 68 A.D.3d 722, 722, 888 N.Y.S.2d 904 [2d Dept 2009]), since the records themselves were not provided to the referee (see Nationstar Mortg' LLC v. Durane-Botiv......
-
Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Hollien
...340 [3d Dept 1993]). 3 Harris's assertions as to the amounts due constituted inadmissible hearsay (see Hypo Holdings, Inc. v. Feuer, 68 A.D.3d 722, 722, 888 N.Y.S.2d 904 [2d Dept 2009]), since the records themselves were not provided to the referee (see Nationstar Mortg' LLC v. Durane-Botiv......
-
CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Bredehorn, 2015–11384
...1000, 1001, 17 N.Y.S.3d 137 ; Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Lopa, 130 A.D.3d 952, 952–953, 15 N.Y.S.3d 105 ; Hypo Holdings, Inc. v. Feuer, 68 A.D.3d 722, 888 N.Y.S.2d 904 ). Further, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting that branch of the plaintiff's motion whic......