U.S. Bank N.A. v. McBride

2024 NY Slip Op 30544(U)
CourtNew York Supreme Court, New York County
DecidedFebruary 16, 2024
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 30544(U) (U.S. Bank N.A. v. McBride) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court, New York County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
U.S. Bank N.A. v. McBride, 2024 NY Slip Op 30544(U) (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2024).

Opinion

U.S. Bank N.A. v McBride 2024 NY Slip Op 30544(U) February 16, 2024 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 850219/2022 Judge: Francis A. Kahn III Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:59 P~ INDEX NO. 850219/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: HON. FRANCIS A. KAHN, Ill PART 32 Justice - - - - - - -------------------------------------------------X INDEX NO. 850219/2022 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR MOTION DATE VELOCITY COMMERCIAL CAPITAL LOAN TRUST VCC 2019-02, MOTION SEQ. NO. 001 Plaintiff,

- V-

BRYANT MCBRIDE, TINA MCBRIDE, THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE, CITY OF NEW YORK, ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DECISION + ORDER ON DEVELOPMENT, NEW YORK CITY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD, JOHN DOE #1-#50 AND JANE DOE MOTION #1-#50, THE LAST TWO NAMES BEING FICTITIOUS, IT BEING INTENDED TO NAME ALL OTHER PARTIES WHO MAY HAVE SOME INTEREST IN OR LIEN UPON THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN THE COMPLAINT

Defendant. --------------------------------------------X

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25,26,27,28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39,40,41,42,43, 44,45, 46,47,48,49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 were read on this motion to/for JUDGMENT-SUMMARY Upon the foregoing documents, the motion and cross-motion are determined as follows:

This is an action to foreclose on a consolidated, modified and extended spreader mortgage encumbering commercial real property located at 148 West 123 rd Street, New York, New York. The mortgage, dated March 29, 2019, was given by Defendants Bryant McBride and Tina McBride ("McBrides") to non-party Velocity Commercial Capital, LLC ("Velocity") to secure an indebtedness with an original principal amount of $1,250,000.00. The above mortgage consolidated two prior mortgages and the transaction is evidenced by a loan agreement of the same date as the mortgage.

Plaintiff commenced this action to foreclose on the mortgage and pied McBrides defaulted in repayment under the loan agreement. Plaintiff also pied causes of action to "extinguish" three prior recorded mortgages. Two were allegedly given by McBrides to Defendants American Home Mortgage as well as City of New York, acting by and through its Department of Housing Preservation and Development ("City"). Plaintiff also sought discharge of a mortgage given by non-party/prior owner Brownstone Partners/AFF, LLC to Defendant The Chase Manhattan Bank. The McBride Defendants answered jointly and pied ten affirmative defenses and one counterclaim. Defendant City answered and pied four affirmative defenses. Now, Plaintiff moves for summary judgment against the appearing Defendants, to strike their answers and affirmative defenses, for a default judgment against the non-

850219/2022 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR VELOCITY Page 1 of 5 COMMERCIAL CAPITAL LOAN TRUST VCC 2019-02 vs. MCBRIDE, BRYANT ET AL Motion No. 001

[* 1] 1 of 7 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:59 P~ INDEX NO. 850219/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

appearing Defendants, for an order of reference and to amend the caption. Defendant City opposes the motion and cross-moves to dismiss the complaint as against it pursuant CPLR §3211 [a] [ 1] and [7]. I'' Plaintiff opposes the cross-motion. ·. In moving for summary judgment on the foreclosure cause of action, Plaintiff was required to establish prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law though proof of the mortgage, the note, and evidence of Defendants' default in repayment (see eg US. Bank, NA. vJames, 180 AD3d 594 [l51 Dept 2020]; Bank of NYv Knowles, 151 AD3d 596 [1 st Dept 2017]; Fortress Credit Corp. v Hudson Yards, LLC, 78 AD3d 577 [1 st Dept 2010]). Based upon McBrides' affirmative defense, Plaintiff was also required to demonstrate it had standing when this action was commenced (see eg Wells Fargo Bank, NA. v Tricario, 180 AD3d 848 [2 nd Dept 2020]). Proof supporting a prima facie case on a motion for summary judgment must be in admissible form (see CPLR §3212[b]; Tri-State Loan Acquisitions Ill LLC v Litkowski, 172 AD3d 780 [1 st Dept 2019]). A plaintiff may rely on evidence from persons with personal knowledge of the facts, documents in admissible form and/or persons with knowledge derived from produced admissible records (see eg US Bank NA. v Moulton, 179 AD3d 734, 738 [2d Dept 2020]). No particular set of business records must be proffered, as long as the admissibility requirements of CPLR 4518 [a] are fulfilled and the records evince the facts for which they are relied upon (see eg Citigroup v Kopelowitz, 147 AD3d 1014, 1015 [2d Dept 2017]).

Plaintiffs motion was supported with an affidavit from Sandie Lawrence ("Lawerence"), a Department Manager Special Servicing of Velocity, the alleged special servicer for Plaintiff, as well as annexed documentation. Lawerence' s affidavit laid a proper foundation for the admission of Plaintiffs records into evidence under CPLR §4518 (see Bank of NY Mellon v Gordon, 171 AD3d 197 [2d Dept 2019]). The affidavit established the mortgage, note, and evidence of mortgagor's default and was sufficiently supported by appropriate documentary evidence (see eg Bank of NY v Knowles, supra; Fortress Credit Corp. v Hudson Yards, LLC, supra).

As to the non-appearing Defendants, "[a ]n applicant for a default judgment against a defendant must submit proof of service of the summons and complaint, proof of the facts constituting the claim, and proof of the defaulting defendant's failure to answer or appear" (Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Silverman, 178 AD3d 898, 899 [2d Dept 2019]). A plaintiff need "only [to] allege enough facts to enable a court to determine that a viable cause of action exists" (Woodson v Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 NY2d 62, 71 [2003 ]). Plaintiff established prima facie its entitlement to a default judgment on its foreclosure cause of action against the other Defendants based upon the above cited evidence as well as proof of service on each Defendant and proof of their failure to appear or answer (see CPLR §3215[f]; SRMOF II 2012-I Trust v Tella, 139 AD3d 599,600 [l st Dept 2016]; US Bank Natl. Assn. v Wolnerman, 135 AD3d 850 [2d Dept 2016]; see also Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Silverman, 178 AD3d 898 [2d Dept 2019]).

Concerning the causes of action to "extinguish" the prior recorded mortgages is a claim for declaratory relief governed by RP APL § 1921 [2] which concerns "canceling and discharging" mortgages ofrecord (see Guccione v Estate of Guccione, 84 AD3d 867 [2d Dept 2011]). Upon review of the 1,

mortgage held by City, the Court observed a recording anomaly whereby two sets ofreel and page numbers are imprinted on the document. To resolve this incongruity, the Court accessed the Automated City Register Information System ("A CRIS") maintained by the Office of the City Register 1• A review

1 This occurrence arose when the mortgage was first erroneously recorded in Kings County on January IO, 2001. On February 23, 2001, the encumbrance was correctly recorded in New York County. 850219/2022 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR VELOCITY Page 2 of 5 COMMERCIAL CAPITAL LOAN TRUST VCC 2019-02 vs. MCBRIDE, BRYANT ET AL Motion No. 001

[* 2] 2 of 7 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2024 04:59 P~ INDEX NO. 850219/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2024

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

Related

Woodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp.
790 N.E.2d 1156 (New York Court of Appeals, 2003)
U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Wolnerman
135 A.D.3d 850 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
SRMOF II 2012-I Trust v. Tella
139 A.D.3d 599 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Citigroup v. Kopelowitz
2017 NY Slip Op 1331 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Bank of New York Mellon v. Knowles
2017 NY Slip Op 5045 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Moulton
2020 NY Slip Op 171 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Tricario
2020 NY Slip Op 1112 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
U.S. Bank N.A. v. James
2020 NY Slip Op 1297 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Fortress Credit Corp. v. Hudson Yards, LLC
78 A.D.3d 577 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Guccione v. Estate of Guccione
84 A.D.3d 867 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Levy v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Greater New York
124 A.D.2d 900 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Mount Vernon Fire Insurance v. NIBA Construction Inc.
195 A.D.2d 425 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Merchants Insurance Co. of New Hampshire, Inc. v. Long Island Pet Cemetery, Inc.
206 A.D.2d 827 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Public Service Mutual Insurance v. AYFAS Realty Corp.
234 A.D.2d 226 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
National Surety Corp. v. Peccichio
48 Misc. 2d 77 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 NY Slip Op 30544(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/us-bank-na-v-mcbride-nysupctnewyork-2024.