Household Finance Realty Corp. v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Household Finance Realty Corp. v. Brown

13 A.D.3d 340, 785 N.Y.S.2d 742, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14855

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

DecidedDecember 6, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by16 cases

This text of 13 A.D.3d 340 (Household Finance Realty Corp. v. Brown) 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

Household Finance Realty Corp. v. Brown, 13 A.D.3d 340, 785 N.Y.S.2d 742, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14855 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage on real property, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (McGuirk, J), dated April 24, 2003, as denied that branch of their motion which was to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the same court entered October 21, 2002, upon their default in answering.

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

A judgment of foreclosure and sale was entered against the defendants upon their default in answering the complaint. The [341]*341defendants moved to vacate the judgment asserting a lack of jurisdiction due to improper service of process. However, the defendants failed to rebut the prima facie evidence of proper service created by the affidavit of the plaintiffs process server (see Bankers Trust Co. of Cal. v Tsoukas, 303 AD2d 343 [2003]; Kaywood v Cigpak, Inc., 258 AD2d 623 [1999]). Thus, the motion was properly denied (see Bankers Trust Co. of Cal. v Tsoukas, supra; Kaywood v Cigpak, Inc., supra).

The defendants’ remaining contentions either are not properly before this Court or without merit. Ritter, J.E, Smith, Rivera and Lifson, 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 on real property, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (McGuirk, J), dated April 24, 2003, as denied that branch of their motion which was to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the same court entered October 21, 2002, upon their default in answering.

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

A judgment of foreclosure and sale was entered against the defendants upon their default in answering the complaint. The [341]*341defendants moved to vacate the judgment asserting a lack of jurisdiction due to improper service of process. However, the defendants failed to rebut the prima facie evidence of proper service created by the affidavit of the plaintiffs process server (see Bankers Trust Co. of Cal. v Tsoukas, 303 AD2d 343 [2003]; Kaywood v Cigpak, Inc., 258 AD2d 623 [1999]). Thus, the motion was properly denied (see Bankers Trust Co. of Cal. v Tsoukas, supra; Kaywood v Cigpak, Inc., supra).

The defendants’ remaining contentions either are not properly before this Court or without merit. Ritter, J.E, Smith, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.3d 340, 785 N.Y.S.2d 742, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14855, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/household-finance-realty-corp-v-brown-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack