U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Stuart
| Decision Date | 24 August 2022 |
| Docket Number | 2019–00824,Index No. 31439/09 |
| Parties | U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., appellant, v. Craig STUART, respondent, et al., defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
208 A.D.3d 824
172 N.Y.S.3d 625 (Mem)
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc., appellant,
v.
Craig STUART, respondent, et al., defendants.
2019–00824
Index No. 31439/09
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued—March 11, 2022
August 24, 2022
Reed Smith LLP, New York, NY (Natsayi Mawere, Andrew B. Messite, and James Faller of counsel), for appellant.
R. David Marquez, P.C., Mineola, NY, for respondent.
BETSY BARROS, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JOSEPH A. ZAYAS, DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Robert J. McDonald, J.), entered November 15, 2018. The order denied the plaintiff's motion to vacate an order of the same court (Martin J. Schulman, J.) entered January 11, 2018, which, among other things, sua sponte, directed dismissal of the complaint without prejudice, and to restore the action to the calendar.
ORDERED that the order entered November 15, 2018, is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the plaintiff's motion to vacate the order entered January 11, 2018, and to restore the action to the calendar is granted.
In November 2009, the plaintiff commenced this action against the defendants Craig Stuart (hereinafter the defendant) and Lois Stuart (hereinafter Lois), among others, to foreclose a mortgage encumbering certain real property in Queens. The plaintiff successfully moved for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant, but the complaint was dismissed insofar as asserted against Lois pursuant to CPLR 3215(c). In November 2015, the plaintiff commenced a separate action against Lois, among others, to foreclose the mortgage, and thereafter, twice unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against Lois in that action.
Meanwhile, a status conference order was entered in this action on May 10, 2017
(hereinafter the status conference order), which,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Am's. v. Gonzales
...for an order of reference was not a sufficient ground upon which to direct dismissal of the complaint (see U.S. Bank N.A. v Stuart, 208 A.D.3d 824, 825; U.S. Bank N.A. v Salgado, 192 A.D.3d 1181, 1182). The Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were f......
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Emanuel
-
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Turner
...to direct dismissal of the complaint (see Citimortgage, Inc. v. Dedalto, 210 A.D.3d 628, 178 N.Y.S.3d 102 ; U.S. Bank N.A. v. Stuart, 208 A.D.3d 824, 825, 172 N.Y.S.3d 625 ; U.S. Bank N.A. v. Salgado, 192 A.D.3d 1181, 1182, 141 N.Y.S.3d 337 ). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have gran......