First Trust National Ass'n v. Pinter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

First Trust National Ass'n v. Pinter

264 A.D.2d 464, 694 N.Y.S.2d 150, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8828

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

DecidedAugust 23, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 464 (First Trust National Ass'n v. Pinter) 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

First Trust National Ass'n v. Pinter, 264 A.D.2d 464, 694 N.Y.S.2d 150, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8828 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose mortgages which were consolidated by agreement dated June 23, 1994, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated July 10, 1998, as granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

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

The plaintiff established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law through the production of the mortgages and notes, evidence of the defendants’ default, the assignment of the mortgage documents to it, and the agreement dated June 23, 1994 (see, Votta v Votta Enters., 249 AD2d 536; Village [465]*465Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, 196 AD2d 812). Since the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to any defense, the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment (see, Village Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, supra). Santucci, J. P., Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to foreclose mortgages which were consolidated by agreement dated June 23, 1994, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Polizzi, J.), dated July 10, 1998, as granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

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

The plaintiff established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law through the production of the mortgages and notes, evidence of the defendants’ default, the assignment of the mortgage documents to it, and the agreement dated June 23, 1994 (see, Votta v Votta Enters., 249 AD2d 536; Village [465]*465Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, 196 AD2d 812). Since the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to any defense, the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment (see, Village Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, supra). Santucci, J. P., Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 464, 694 N.Y.S.2d 150, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-trust-national-assn-v-pinter-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack