BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. WHITTY, JEAN

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 28, 2012
DocketCA 12-01228
StatusPublished

This text of BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. WHITTY, JEAN (BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. WHITTY, JEAN) 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
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. WHITTY, JEAN, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1318 CA 12-01228 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND WHALEN, JJ.

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, FORMERLY KNOWN AS BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS CWALT, INC., ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2006-16 CB MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-16 CB, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JEAN WHITTY, ALSO KNOWN AS JEAN C. WHITTY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

RICHARD E. CLARK, PLLC, LIVERPOOL (RICHARD E. CLARK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

BLANK ROME LLP, NEW YORK CITY (ADAM M. SWANSON OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (John C. Cherundolo, A.J.), entered May 10, 2012. The order, among other things, granted the motion of defendant Jean Whitty, also known as Jean C. Whitty, to dismiss the complaint and dismissed the complaint without prejudice.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this mortgage foreclosure action, Jean Whitty, also known as Jean C. Whitty (defendant), moved to dismiss the complaint with prejudice. Supreme Court granted that part of the motion to dismiss the complaint, but ordered that it be dismissed without prejudice. We affirm. Contrary to defendant’s contention, we conclude under the circumstances presented here that the court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint without prejudice (see generally Castillo v County of Suffolk, 307 AD2d 305, 305). We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are either without merit or not preserved for our review.

Entered: December 28, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

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

Related

Castillo v. County of Suffolk
307 A.D.2d 305 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. WHITTY, JEAN, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-new-york-mellon-v-whitty-jean-nyappdiv-2012.