Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rios

• Decision Date: 18 April 2018
• Docket Number: 2015–10486,Index No. 15440/13,2015–10480
• Citation: 74 N.Y.S.3d 321 (Mem),160 A.D.3d 912
• Parties: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., plaintiff-respondent, v. Edna RIOS, defendant-respondent, Patrick Nurse, et al., appellants, et al., defendant (and a third-party action).
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

160 A.D.3d 912
74 N.Y.S.3d 321 (Mem)

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., plaintiff-respondent,
v.
Edna RIOS, defendant-respondent,

Patrick Nurse, et al., appellants, et al., defendant (and a third-party action).

2015–10480
2015–10486
Index No. 15440/13

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

Argued—January 4, 2018
April 18, 2018

Butler, Fitzgerald, Fiveson & McCarthy, New York, N.Y. (David K. Fiveson and Claudia G. Jaffe of counsel), for appellants.

Ackerman, Levine, Cullen, Brickman & Limmer, LLP, Great Neck, N.Y. (Todd Harris Hesekiel, Benjamin S. Kaplan, and Woods Oviatt Gilman, LLP, of counsel), for plaintiff-respondent.

Richland & Falkowski, PLLC, Lindenhurst, N.Y. (Daniel H. Richland of counsel), for defendant-respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, ROBERT J. MILLER, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

74 N.Y.S.3d 322

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants Patrick Nurse and Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, appeal (1), as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Arthur, M.Schack, J.), dated August 12, 2015, as granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b) which were to dismiss the first and seventh affirmative defenses asserted in their respective answers, and (2) from an order of the same court, also dated August 12, 2015, which granted the motion of the defendant Edna Rios pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss their respective cross claims for indemnification asserted against her.

ORDERED that the first order dated August 12, 2015, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, and those branches of the plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b) which were to dismiss the first and seventh affirmative defenses asserted in the appellants' respective answers are denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that the second order dated August 12, 2015, is reversed, on the law, and the motion of the defendant Edna Rios pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the appellants' respective cross claims for indemnification asserted against her is...