Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Shimon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Shimon

84 A.D.3d 861, 921 N.Y.S.2d 909

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

DecidedMay 10, 2011

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 84 A.D.3d 861 (Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Shimon) 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

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Shimon, 84 A.D.3d 861, 921 N.Y.S.2d 909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Moshe Shimon appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Kelly, J.), entered April 26, 2010, as granted those branches of the plaintiff’s motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against him and to appoint a referee to compute the amount due to the plaintiff.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant’s contention that the branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against him should have been denied as premature (see CPLR 3212 [f]) is raised for the first time on appeal and, therefore, is not properly before us (see Aglow Studios, Inc. v Karlsson, 83 AD3d 747 [2d Dept 2011]; Burgos v Rateb, 64 AD3d 530, 531 [2009]).

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. Prudenti, EJ., Angiolillo, Dickerson and Roman, 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 defendant Moshe Shimon appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Kelly, J.), entered April 26, 2010, as granted those branches of the plaintiff’s motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against him and to appoint a referee to compute the amount due to the plaintiff.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant’s contention that the branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against him should have been denied as premature (see CPLR 3212 [f]) is raised for the first time on appeal and, therefore, is not properly before us (see Aglow Studios, Inc. v Karlsson, 83 AD3d 747 [2d Dept 2011]; Burgos v Rateb, 64 AD3d 530, 531 [2009]).

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. Prudenti, EJ., Angiolillo, Dickerson and Roman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 A.D.3d 861, 921 N.Y.S.2d 909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deutsche-bank-national-trust-co-v-shimon-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack