JPMorgan Chase Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Wenegieme

• Decision Date: 20 June 2018
• Docket Number: 2015–10686,2015–10685,Index No. 148/13
• Parties: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, respondent, v. Celeste M. WENEGIEME, appellant, et al., defendants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

162 A.D.3d 876
81 N.Y.S.3d 54

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, respondent,
v.
Celeste M. WENEGIEME, appellant, et al., defendants.

2015–10685
2015–10686
Index No. 148/13

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

Submitted—February 1, 2018
June 20, 2018

Ronald D. Weiss, P.C., Melville, NY, for appellant.

Blank Rome LLP, New York, N.Y. (Diana M. Eng and Timothy W. Salter of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.

81 N.Y.S.3d 55

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Celeste M. Wenegieme appeals from two orders of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Thomas F. Whelan, J.), both dated March 27, 2015. The orders, insofar as appealed from, granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Celeste M. Wenegieme, to strike that defendant's answer, and to appoint a referee to compute the amount owed to the plaintiff.

ORDERED that the orders are affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

On December 19, 2007, the defendant Celeste M. Wenegieme (hereinafter the defendant) obtained a loan from the plaintiff in the principal sum of $357,675, which was secured by a mortgage on real property located in Ridge, New York. On January 2, 2013, the plaintiff commenced this mortgage foreclosure action against, among others, the defendant. The defendant served a pro se answer.

In December 2014, the plaintiff moved, inter alia, for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant, to strike the defendant's answer, and to appoint a referee to compute the amount owed to the plaintiff. The defendant opposed the motion. In two orders, both dated March 27, 2015, the Supreme Court, inter alia, granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant, struck the defendant's answer, and appointed a referee to compute the amount owed to...