Citimortgage, Inc. v. Stosel

89 A.D.3d 887, 934 N.Y.2d 182
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 15, 2011
StatusPublished
Cited by26 cases

This text of 89 A.D.3d 887 (Citimortgage, Inc. v. Stosel) 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
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Stosel, 89 A.D.3d 887, 934 N.Y.2d 182 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

[888]*888Where, as here, a plaintiffs standing to commence a foreclosure action is placed in issue by the defendant, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to prove its standing to be entitled to relief (see US Bank N.A. v Madero, 80 AD3d 751, 752 [2011]; U.S. Bank, N.A. v Collymore, 68 AD3d 752, 753 [2009]). A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by demonstrating that it is both the holder or assignee of the subject mortgage and the holder or assignee of the underlying note, “either by physical delivery or execution of a written assignment prior to the commencement of the action” (Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Weisblum, 85 AD3d 95, 108 [2011]). Moreover, “an assignment of the mortgage without assignment of the underlying note or bond is a nullity” (U.S. Bank, N.A. v Collymore, 68 AD3d at 754; see Bank of N.Y. v Silverberg, 86 AD3d 274, 280 [2011]).

Contrary to the determination of the Supreme Court, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that it had standing to commence this foreclosure action, since it failed to establish how or when it became the lawful holder of the note either by delivery or valid assignment of the note to it (see e.g. Bank of N.Y. v Silverberg, 86 AD3d at 280-283; Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Weisblum, 85 AD3d at 109; US Bank N.A. v Madero, 80 AD3d at 752-753; U.S. Bank, N.A. v Collymore, 68 AD3d at 754). Accordingly, under the circumstances presented, those branches of the plaintiffs motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Usher Stosel and for an order of reference should have been denied, and that branch of the cross motion of the defendant Usher Stosel which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him for lack of standing should have been granted.

[889]*889In view of the foregoing, we do not reach the remaining contentions of the defendant Usher Stosel. Dillon, J.E, Baltin, Eng and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

Related

UMB Bank, N.A. v. Taif Devs. L.L.C.
2026 NY Slip Op 30619(U) (New York Supreme Court, Queens County, 2026)
Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy., FSB v. Decatur 1147 LLC
2025 NY Slip Op 34398(U) (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2025)
NDF1, LLC v. Tubbs
E.D. New York, 2025
Sanfilippo v. Bohme
192 N.Y.S.3d 386 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Rockefeller
2017 NY Slip Op 8348 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Klein
140 A.D.3d 913 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Bank of New York Mellon v. Visconti
136 A.D.3d 950 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP v. Bertram
51 Misc. 3d 770 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)
TD Bank, N.A. v. Mandia
133 A.D.3d 590 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Vitellas
131 A.D.3d 52 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n v. Baptiste
128 A.D.3d 773 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Catizone
127 A.D.3d 1151 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
PNC Bank, N.A. v. Klein
125 A.D.3d 953 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Ali
122 A.D.3d 726 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Arias
121 A.D.3d 973 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
US Bank, N.A. v. Morrison
120 A.D.3d 1223 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
FTBK Investor II LLC v. Genesis Holding LLC
48 Misc. 3d 274 (New York Supreme Court, 2014)
Midfirst Bank v. Agho
121 A.D.3d 343 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Peak Financial Partners, Inc. v. Brook
119 A.D.3d 539 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 A.D.3d 887, 934 N.Y.2d 182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/citimortgage-inc-v-stosel-nyappdiv-2011.