Wall Street Mortgage Bankers v. Gonzalez

126 A.D.3d 602, 3 N.Y.S.3d 596
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 24, 2015·No. 14599N 380581/09·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mark Friedlander, J.), entered July 10, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on its mortgage foreclosure claim against defendant Socrates Gonzalez, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff made a prima facie showing of its right to foreclosure by producing the note, mortgage and evidence of nonpayment, and, in opposition, defendant failed to raise a triable issue regarding his affirmative defenses (see Red Tulip, LLC v Neiva, 44 AD3d 204, 209 [1st Dept 2007], lv dismissed 10 NY3d 741 [2008]). The court properly disregarded the mistake in the pleadings stating that plaintiff was a Delaware corporation (see CPLR 2001), and defendant otherwise failed to establish a triable issue regarding plaintiffs standing.

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

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

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

Wall Street Mortgage Bankers v. Gonzalez, 126 A.D.3d 602, 3 N.Y.S.3d 596 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

126 A.D.3d 602 (Wall Street Mortgage Bankers v. Gonzalez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilmington Trust v. Ragobar Sukhu
2017 NY Slip Op 8455 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)