HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Ji Youn Min

2025 NY Slip Op 02269
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 17, 2025
DocketIndex No. 850245/19; Appeal No. 4129; Case No. 2024-04657
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 02269 (HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Ji Youn Min) 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
HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Ji Youn Min, 2025 NY Slip Op 02269 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Ji Youn Min (2025 NY Slip Op 02269)
HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Ji Youn Min
2025 NY Slip Op 02269
Decided on April 17, 2025
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered: April 17, 2025
Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Kennedy, Kapnick, Scarpulla, Higgitt, JJ.

Index No. 850245/19|Appeal No. 4129|Case No. 2024-04657|

[*1]HSBC Bank USA, National Association, as Trustee for Holders of Deutschealt-A Securities Inc. etc., Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Ji Youn Min, Defendant-Appellant, Sung Jin Min, et al., Defendants.


Law Firm of Kim, Choi & Kim, P.C., Bayside (Dong Sung Kim of counsel), for appellant.

Davidson Fink, LLP, Rochester (Richard Franco of counsel), for respondent.



Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Francis A. Kahn III, J.), entered July 10, 2024, which, inter alia, upon renewal, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and dismissed defendant's affirmative defenses, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Contrary to plaintiff's contention, even if plaintiff served a sufficiently compliant notice in June 2014 in advance of a prior 2015 action that was dismissed, there is no dispute that this 90-day notice did not contain all of the mandatory language and information set forth in the version of RPAPL 1304(1) in effect at the time plaintiff commenced this action in 2019 (see Bank of Am., N.A. v Kessler, 39 NY3d 317, 325 [2023]). Thus, plaintiff did not establish that it strictly complied with RPAPL 1304(1) (see HSBC Bank USA v Rice, 155 AD3d 443, 443 [1st Dept 2017]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: April 17, 2025



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

Related

HSBC Bank USA v. Rice
2017 NY Slip Op 7936 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 NY Slip Op 02269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hsbc-bank-usa-na-v-ji-youn-min-nyappdiv-2025.