Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston

57 A.D.3d 808, 872 N.Y.2d 134
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 23, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 57 A.D.3d 808 (Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston, 57 A.D.3d 808, 872 N.Y.2d 134 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

A notice of pendency is valid for three years from the date of filing. A party seeking to extend a notice of pendency for an additional three-year period must first make a showing of good cause (see CPLR 6513; Matter of Sakow, 97 NY2d 436, 442 [2002]; RKO Props., Ltd. v Boymelgreen, 31 AD 3d 625 [2006]). Here, the plaintiff established good cause for extending the notice of pendency by showing that the instant foreclosure action [809]*809was automatically stayed as a result of one of the appellants having filed for bankruptcy (see Stassou v Casini & Huang Constr., 203 AD2d 357 [1994]).

The appellants’ challenge to the plaintiffs standing is not properly before this Court, as we are bound by the law of the case established by the decision and order on the prior appeal of this matter (see Aames Funding Corp. v Houston, 44 AD3d 692, 693 [2007]; see generally Abbas v Cole, 44 AD3d 31, 37 [2007]). In any event, even if the law of the case doctrine was inapplicable, the defendants waived the defense of standing by not raising it as an affirmative defense or by way of motion to dismiss (see CPLR 3211 [e]; Matter of Fossella v Dinkins, 66 NY2d 162, 167-168 [1985]; Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v Mastropaolo, 42 AD3d 239, 242-243 [2007]). Fisher, J.P., Florio, Carni and Chambers, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Miller v. Fuentes
2025 NY Slip Op 03564 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
Strong Is. Contr. Corp. v. Padilla
194 N.Y.S.3d 246 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Erobobo
127 A.D.3d 1176 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Board of Managers of Marbury Club Condominium v. Marbury Corners, LLC
119 A.D.3d 830 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Pietranico
33 Misc. 3d 528 (New York Supreme Court, 2011)
Aames Funding Corp. v. Houston
85 A.D.3d 1070 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Citibank, N.A. v. Herrera
64 A.D.3d 536 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Northbay Construction Co. v. Bauco Construction Corp.
64 A.D.3d 548 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Lot 57 Acquisition Corp. v. Yat Yar Equities Corp.
63 A.D.3d 1109 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 A.D.3d 808, 872 N.Y.2d 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aames-funding-corp-v-houston-nyappdiv-2008.