OneWest Bank, FSB v. Singh

Decision Date16 September 2020
Docket NumberIndex No. 22696/09,2018-07655
Parties ONEWEST BANK, FSB, Appellant, v. Deryck A. SINGH, et al., Defendants; BSD 253, LLC, Proposed Intervenor-Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Gross Polowy, LLC, Westbury, N.Y. (Stephen J. Vargas of counsel), for appellant.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JEFFREY A. COHEN, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lawrence Knipel, J.), dated March 15, 2018. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied, as academic, the plaintiff's motion to vacate a sua sponte order of the same court dated February 13, 2014, conditionally dismissing the action pursuant to CPLR 3216, and to restore the action to the calendar.

ORDERED that the order dated March 15, 2018, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the plaintiff's motion to vacate the order dated February 13, 2014, and to restore the action to the calendar is granted.

CPLR 3216(b)(1) states that no dismissal should be made under this statute unless issue has been joined. " ‘A court may not dismiss an action based on neglect to prosecute unless the CPLR 3216 statutory preconditions to dismissal are met’ " ( Bank of N.Y. v. Harper , 176 A.D.3d 907, 908, 110 N.Y.S.3d 736, quoting Delgado v. New York City Hous. Auth. , 21 A.D.3d 522, 522, 801 N.Y.S.2d 43 ; see National City Mtge. Co. v. Sclavos , 172 A.D.3d 884, 885, 99 N.Y.S.3d 430 ). Here, none of the defendants submitted an answer to the complaint and, thus, issue was never joined (see CPLR 3216[b][1] ; Bank of N.Y. v. Harper , 176 A.D.3d at 908, 110 N.Y.S.3d 736 ; National City Mtge. Co. v. Sclavos , 172 A.D.3d at 885, 99 N.Y.S.3d 430 ; U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Picone , 170 A.D.3d 1070, 1072, 96 N.Y.S.3d 671 ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Augustin , 155 A.D.3d 823, 824, 63 N.Y.S.3d 876 ). Since at least one precondition set forth in CPLR 3216 was not met, the Supreme Court was without power to issue an order conditionally dismissing the action pursuant to that statute (see Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Augustin , 155 A.D.3d at 824, 63 N.Y.S.3d 876 ; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Pinargote , 150 A.D.3d 1311, 52 N.Y.S.3d 907 ).

Therefore, the Supreme Court should have granted the plaintiff's motion to vacate the order dated February 13, 2014, conditionally...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Esdelle
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • September 16, 2020
  • U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Sanchez
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 2, 2022
    ...was not met, the court was without power to direct dismissal of the complaint pursuant to that statute (see OneWest Bank, FSB v. Singh, 186 A.D.3d 1388, 1389, 128 N.Y.S.3d 873 ; Bank of N.Y. v. Harper, 176 A.D.3d at 908, 110 N.Y.S.3d 736 ; US Bank, N.A. v. Picone, 170 A.D.3d 1070, 1072, 96 ......
  • U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Deceus
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • September 16, 2020

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT