JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Bus. Payment Sys., LLC

• Decision Date: 08 April 2015
• Docket Number: 2013-03028, Index No. 6593/12.
• Parties: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., respondent, v. BUSINESS PAYMENT SYSTEMS, LLC, et al., appellants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

127 A.D.3d 822
4 N.Y.S.3d 901 (Mem)
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 02938

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., respondent
v.
BUSINESS PAYMENT SYSTEMS, LLC, et al., appellants.

2013-03028, Index No. 6593/12.

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

April 8, 2015.

MC Shapiro Law Group, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Jacob H. Nemon, Mitchell C. Shapiro, and Zaki Isaac B. Tamir of counsel), for appellants.

Bonchonsky & Zaino, LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (Leonard P. Marinello of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion

127 A.D.3d 822

In an action to recover on a promissory note and guaranty, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Goodstein, J.), entered February 5, 2013, which, upon an order of the same court entered January 23, 2013, granting the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $90,087.47. The notice of appeal from the order entered January 23, 2013, is deemed to be a notice of appeal from the judgment entered February 5, 2013 (see CPLR 5512[a] ).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In support of its motion for summary judgment on the complaint, the plaintiff met its initial burden of demonstrating its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof of the existence of an underlying note and guaranty executed by the defendants, the unconditional terms of repayment, and the defendants' failure to make payment (see Manufacturers & Traders Trust Co. v. Capital Bldg. & Dev., Inc., 114 A.D.3d 912, 912–913, 980 N.Y.S.2d 813 ; Griffon V, LLC v. 11 E. 36th, LLC, 90 A.D.3d 705, 706, 934 N.Y.S.2d 472 ; JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Galt Group, Inc., 84 A.D.3d 1028, 1029, 923 N.Y.S.2d 643 ; Famolaro v. Crest Offset, Inc., 24 A.D.3d 604, 604, 807 N.Y.S.2d 387 ). In this regard, we, like the Supreme Court, reject the defendants' contention that the loan documents submitted by the plaintiff in support of its motion were “illegible.” In opposition to the plaintiff's prima facie showing, the defendants failed to raise a triable...