BD Notes LLC v. Garofalo Real Estate Holdings, LLC

2024 NY Slip Op 31937(U)
CourtNew York Supreme Court, New York County
DecidedJune 3, 2024
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 31937(U) (BD Notes LLC v. Garofalo Real Estate Holdings, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court, New York County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
BD Notes LLC v. Garofalo Real Estate Holdings, LLC, 2024 NY Slip Op 31937(U) (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2024).

Opinion

BD Notes LLC v Garofalo Real Estate Holdings, LLC 2024 NY Slip Op 31937(U) June 3, 2024 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 850162/2022 Judge: Francis A. Kahn III Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. - ..-.,.c--~:r:a~ INDEX NO. 850162/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 169 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/04/2024

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: HON. FRANCIS A. KAHN, Ill PART 32 Justice ------------------------------------------,-----X INDEX NO. 850162/2022 BD NOTES LLC, MOTION DATE Plaintiff, MOTION SEQ. NO. 003 -v- GAROFALO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS, LLC,LAURA GAROFALO, CITY OF NEW YORK, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, MATT PRICE, ABBEY DALLAS, ARIEL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE MOSCONI, MATTHEW KENNEDY, THERESA AND SALE and DECISION + HEDGEPETH, NICOLE SHI, ARI AXELROD, DILLAN ORDER ON MOTION CARTER,

Defendant. ------X

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 003) 127, 128, 129, 130, 131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151, 152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162,163 were read on this motion to/for JUDGMENT - FORECLOSURE & SALE

Upon the foregoing documents the motion is determined as follows:

This is an action to foreclose on a mortgage encumbering a commercial parcel of real property located 330 West 86th Street, New York, New York. The mortgage, dated December 1, 2014, was given by Defendant Garofalo Real Estate Holdings LLC ("Holdings") to non-party Signature Bank ("Signature"). The mortgage secures a loan with an original principal amount of $4,300,000.00 which is evidenced by a restated mortgage note of the same date as the mortgage. The note and mortgage were executed by Defendant Laura Garofalo ("Garofalo") as the managing and sole member of Holdings. Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and an order ofreference was granted by order of this Court dated December 8, 2023. Now, Plaintiff moves to confirm the December 27, 2023, report of Referee Paul Sklar, Esq. and for the issuance of a judgment of foreclosure and sale. Defendants Holdings and Garofalo oppose the motion.

"The report of a referee should be confirmed whenever the findings are substantially supported by the record, and the referee has clearly defined the issues and resolved matters of credibility" (Citimortgage, Inc. v Kidd, 148 AD3d 767, 768 [2d Dept 2017]; see also Bank of NY Mellon v Davis, 193 AD3d 803 [2d Dept 2021 ]). A Plaintiff may rely on evidence from persons with personal knowledge of the facts, documents in admissible form and/or persons with knowledge derived from t r produced admissible records (see eg US. Bank NA. v Moulton, 179 AD3d 734, 738 [2d Dept 2020]). After issuance of the Referee's report, the Supreme Court is authorized to reject the report, in whole or in part, and render its own findings (see eg Bank ofAm., NA. v Barton, 199 AD3d 625 [2d Dept 2021 ]).

850162/2022 BD NOTES LLC vs. GAROFALO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS, LLC ET AL Page 1 of 6 Motion No. 003

[* 1] 1 of 7 INDEX NO. 850162/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 169 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/04/2024

In support of the calculation, Plaintiff submitted the affidavit of Steve Hackel ("Hackel"), an Authorized Officer of Plaintiff. Hackel demonstrated personal knowledge of Plaintiffs recordkeeping procedures and laid a proper foundation for the admission of its records by demonstrating the requisites of CPLR §4518 (see Bank of NY Mellon v Gordon, 171 AD3d 197 [2d Dept 2019]). The records of prior servicers were also admissible since Hackel attested those records were received from the makers, incorporated into the records Plaintiff kept and it routinely relied on such records in its business (see Bank ofAm., NA. v Brannon, 156 AD3d 1, 10 [1st Dept 2017]; cf US. Bank NA. v Kropp-Somoza, 191 AD3d 918 [2d Dept 2021 ]; Tri-State Loan Acquisitions III, LLC v Litkowski, 172 AD3d 780, 782-783 ·1· [2d Dept 2019]). The affidavit and the records attached to thereto sufficiently supported the Referee's . calculation (see US. Bank, NA. v Saraceno, 14 7 AD3d I 005 [2d Dept 2017]; HSBC Bank USA, NA. v . Simmons, 125 AD3d 930 [2d Dept 2015]). The branch of the motion to amend the caption is denied as unnecessary.

In opposition, the claim that the Referee was required to conduct a hearing with live witnesses is meritless since "absent the existence of a relevant factual dispute a referee is not required to hold a hearing prior to issuing a report in every case" (Bank of NY Mellon v Tedesco, 174 AD3d 490, 492 [2d Dept 2019]; see also Dune Deck Owners Corp. v JJ&P. Assocs. Corp., 85 AD3d 1091 [2d Dept 2011]). In support of this claim, Defendants failed to identify what disputed factual issues required a hearing. In any event, the claim that Defendants lacked an opportunity to submit information to the Referee is of no moment since "[ w ]here, as here, a defendant had an opportunity to raise questions and submit evidence directly to the Supreme Court, which evidence could be considered by the court in determining whether to confirm the referee's report, the defendant is not prejudiced by any error in failing to hold a hearing" (Bank of Am., NA. v Scher, 205 AD3d 989, 990 [2d Dept 2022]; see also Bank of NY Mellon v Viola, 181 AD3d 767 [2d Dept 2020]). Also, Defendants' assertion that Plaintiff failed to lay a proper foundation under CPLR §4518[a] is without merit (see US. Bank Trust, NA. v Bank of Am., NA., 201 AD3d 769, 772 [2d Dept 2022]).

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the motion for a judgment of foreclosure and sale and to confirm the referee's report is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that the mortgaged property described in the complaint and as described in this judgment, or such part thereof as may be sufficient to discharge the mortgage debt, the expense of sale and the costs of this action as provided in the RP APL be sold within 1 year of this judgment, in one parcel, at a public auction at the New York County Courthouse located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York under the direction of Paul Sklar, Esq., who is appointed Referee for this purpose; and it is further

ORDERED that PRIOR to scheduling publication, Plaintiff shall contact the auction part clerk at sfc-foreclosures@nycourts.gov and obtain consent to place the matter on the auction calendar and, thereafter, Plaintiff shall upload the notice of sale to NYSCEF at least 21 days before the sale and the Referee. IF THE AUCTION IS NOT ON THE CALENDAR, then the auction will not go forward; and ;; it is further

ORDERED that after receiving permission from the Auction Part Clerk, the Referee shall give public notice of the time and place of sale in accordance with RP APL 231 (2) in the New York Amsterdam News; and the referee need not conduct the sale unless plaintiff shall provide the referee

850162/2022 BD NOTES LLC vs. GAROFALO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS, LLC ET AL Page 2 of 6 Motion No. 003

[* 2] 2 of 7 INDEX NO. 850162/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 169 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/04/2024

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

Related

HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n v. Simmons
125 A.D.3d 930 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Kidd
2017 NY Slip Op 1668 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Bank of America, National Ass'n v. Brannon
2017 NY Slip Op 7578 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Moulton
2020 NY Slip Op 171 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Viola
2020 NY Slip Op 1895 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Kropp-Somoza
2021 NY Slip Op 01082 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Davis
2021 NY Slip Op 02267 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Jordan v. Freeman
40 A.D.2d 656 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1972)
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Bank of Am., N.A.
201 A.D.3d 769 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 NY Slip Op 31937(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bd-notes-llc-v-garofalo-real-estate-holdings-llc-nysupctnewyork-2024.