Countrywide Funding Corp. v. Reynolds

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Countrywide Funding Corp. v. Reynolds

282 A.D.2d 569, 723 N.Y.S.2d 371, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3782

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 16, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D.2d 569 (Countrywide Funding Corp. v. Reynolds) 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

Countrywide Funding Corp. v. Reynolds, 282 A.D.2d 569, 723 N.Y.S.2d 371, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3782 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schmidt, J.), dated March 28, 2000, which denied its motion for summary judgment against the defendants Anthony W. Reynolds and Barbara E. Reynolds, a/k/a Barbara Newman.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against the respondents. In opposition to the plaintiff’s prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the respondents submitted sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the mortgage payments that were due in July and August 1993 were paid before the notice to cure dated September 27, 1993 (see, Red Rock Holdings v Mandel, 220 AD2d 495; Pellicane v Norstar Bank, 213 AD2d 610; cf., LBV Props. v Greenport Dev. Co., 188 AD2d 588). O’Brien, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schmidt, J.), dated March 28, 2000, which denied its motion for summary judgment against the defendants Anthony W. Reynolds and Barbara E. Reynolds, a/k/a Barbara Newman.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against the respondents. In opposition to the plaintiff’s prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the respondents submitted sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the mortgage payments that were due in July and August 1993 were paid before the notice to cure dated September 27, 1993 (see, Red Rock Holdings v Mandel, 220 AD2d 495; Pellicane v Norstar Bank, 213 AD2d 610; cf., LBV Props. v Greenport Dev. Co., 188 AD2d 588). O’Brien, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 569, 723 N.Y.S.2d 371, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/countrywide-funding-corp-v-reynolds-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack