Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Dimura

127 A.D.3d 1152, 7 N.Y.S.3d 573
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 29, 2015
Docket2014-04314
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 127 A.D.3d 1152 (Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Dimura) 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
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Dimura, 127 A.D.3d 1152, 7 N.Y.S.3d 573 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

*1153 In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants Michael Dimura and Jacqueline Dimura appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Slobod, J.), dated April 1, 2014, which, upon a decision of the same court also dated April I, 2014, granted the plaintiffs motion, inter alia, for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the plaintiffs motion, inter alia, for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants Michael Dimura and Jacqueline Dimura is denied.

The plaintiff failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In support of its motion, the plaintiff did not demonstrate that it complied with the condition precedent contained in the subject mortgage agreement, which required that it provide the defendants Michael Dimura and Jacqueline Dimura (hereinafter together the defendants) with a notice of default prior to demanding payment of the loan in full. The evidence did not establish that the required notice was mailed by first class mail or actually delivered to the notice address if sent by other means, as required by the terms of the mortgage agreement (see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Eisler, 118 AD3d 982, 982-983 [2014]; HSBC Mtge. Corp. [USA] v Gerber, 100 AD3d 966, 966-967 [2012]; Norwest Bank Minn, v Sabloff, 297 AD2d 722, 723 [2002]). The plaintiffs failure to make a prima facie showing required the denial of its motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the defendants’ opposition papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]).

The parties’ remaining contentions either are without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.

Rivera, J. R, Roman, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Crimi
2020 NY Slip Op 3376 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
PNMAC Mtge. Opportunity Fund Invs., LLC v. Torres
2019 NY Slip Op 6523 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Tobing
2019 NY Slip Op 3751 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Sakizada
2019 NY Slip Op 162 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n v. Ozcan
2017 NY Slip Op 7242 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Sabloff
2017 NY Slip Op 6313 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Emigrant Bank v. Myers
2017 NY Slip Op 1338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
US Bank National Ass'n v. Singh
2017 NY Slip Op 1250 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Onewest Bank, FSB v. Smith
135 A.D.3d 1063 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 A.D.3d 1152, 7 N.Y.S.3d 573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nationstar-mortgage-llc-v-dimura-nyappdiv-2015.