Valley National Bank v. Gurba

2017 NY Slip Op 2601, 149 A.D.3d 412, 51 N.Y.S.3d 65
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 4, 2017·No. 3624 102457/10·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered December 15, 2014, which, after an inquest, dismissed defendants’ affirmative defense of failure to mitigate *413 and directed entry of judgment in plaintiffs favor in the total amount of $4,905,185.26, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly dismissed the defense of failure to mitigate, since plaintiff had no duty to sell the nonperishable collateral at any particular time, regardless of the demand of defendants (see First Intl. Bank of Israel v Blankstein & Son, 59 NY2d 436, 447 [1983]). The court also correctly allowed the calculation of the debt based on default interest, where plaintiff had the clear contractual right to impose such interest once a default occurred.

The fraud defenses were dismissed in another order not appealed from, and, in any event, the defenses were correctly dismissed, as there was no writing that met the requirements of 12 USC § 1823 (e) (1) (see Aurora Loan Servs. LLC v Sadek, 809 F Supp 2d 235, 241 [SD NY 2011]).

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Valley National Bank v. Gurba, 2017 NY Slip Op 2601, 149 A.D.3d 412, 51 N.Y.S.3d 65 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

2017 NY Slip Op 2601 (Valley National Bank v. Gurba) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Gelani M. (Paul M.)
2023 NY Slip Op 06442 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)