Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Sasson
Citation | 167 A.D.3d 818,90 N.Y.S.3d 72 |
Decision Date | 12 December 2018 |
Docket Number | 6413/11,Index No. 6413/11,2016–05944,2016–05937 |
Parties | WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., etc., Respondent, v. Jaclyn SASSON, et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Michael J. Oziel, Syosset, NY, for appellants.
Akerman LLP, New York, N.Y. (Jordan M. Smith of counsel), for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, ROBERT J. MILLER, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants Jaclyn Sasson and Joseph Sasson appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Thomas A. Adams, J.), entered December 10, 2015, and (2) an order of the same court entered December 11, 2015. The order entered December 10, 2015, insofar as appealed from, granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants and for an order of reference. The order entered December 11, 2015, insofar as appealed from, granted the same relief and referred the matter to a referee to compute the amount due to the plaintiff.
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.
In May 2007, Joseph Sasson and Jaclyn Sasson (hereinafter together the defendants) executed a note in the sum of $1,100,000 in favor of Bank of America, N.A. (hereinafter Bank of America). The note was secured by a mortgage on residential property located in Jericho. By "Assignment of Mortgage" dated March 22, 2011, Bank of America assigned the note and mortgage to the plaintiff. In April 2011, the plaintiff commenced this action to foreclose the mortgage. The defendants served an answer in which they asserted, inter alia, the affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction based on improper service.
In July 2015, the plaintiff moved, inter alia, for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants and for an order of reference. The Supreme Court granted the motion, and the defendants appeal.
The defendants' contention that summary judgment was premature because of outstanding discovery is without merit. The defendants failed to provide an evidentiary basis to suggest that discovery might lead to relevant evidence or that the facts essential to justify opposition to the motion were in the exclusive knowledge and control of the moving party (see Mogul v. Baptiste, 161 A.D.3d 847, 76 N.Y.S.3d 210 ; Suero–Sosa v. Cardona, 112 A.D.3d 706, 708, 977 N.Y.S.2d 61 ).
The defendants' contention that the Supreme Court should have directed a hearing to determine whether they were properly served with the summons and complaint is without merit, as they waived the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by failing to move to dismiss on that ground within 60 days of serving their answer (see CPLR 3211[e] ; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Cajas, 159 A.D.3d 977, 978, 73 N.Y.S.3d 223 ; JP Morgan Chase Bank v. Munoz, 85 A.D.3d 1124, 1126, 927 N.Y.S.2d 364 ; Federici v. Metropolis Night Club, Inc., 48 A.D.3d 741, 742, 853 N.Y.S.2d 160 ).
RPAPL 1304(1) provides that "at least ninety days before a lender, an assignee or a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n v. Tigani
...to satisfy its burden (see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Gonzalez, 174 A.D.3d 555, 557–558, 104 N.Y.S.3d 167 ; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Sasson, 167 A.D.3d 818, 819, 90 N.Y.S.3d 72 ; Excel Capital Group Corp. v. 225 Ross St. Realty, Inc., 165 A.D.3d 1233, 1235–1236, 87 N.Y.S.3d 604 )."Where, as......
-
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Leonardo
...Mtge., LLC v. McLean, 140 A.D.3d 1131, 1132, 35 N.Y.S.3d 188 ; Wells Fargo Bank, NA v. Besemer, 131 A.D.3d 1047, 1049, 16 N.Y.S.3d 819 ; 167 A.D.3d 818 HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Miller, 121 A.D.3d 1044, 1046, 995 N.Y.S.2d 198 ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Gutierrez, 102 A.D.3d 825, 825, 9......
-
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Nimkoff
...opposition to the renewed motion were in the exclusive knowledge and control of the plaintiff (see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Sasson, 167 A.D.3d 818, 819, 90 N.Y.S.3d 72 ). Additionally, contrary to the defendant's contention, under the circumstances of this case, this Court's prior decision......
-
Normandy Capital Tr. v. 2606 Clarendon Rd. LLC
...the court extends the time upon the ground of undue hardship" (3211 [e] [emphasis added]; see also Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Sasson, 167 A.D.3d 818, 819 [2018] [holding: that defendant "waived the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by failing to move to dismiss on that ground within 60......