Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Munoz
Opinion
| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Munoz |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 01489 |
| Decided on February 28, 2019 |
| 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. |
Friedman, J.P., Kapnick, Webber, Oing, Singh, JJ.
8541 30527/08
v
Sheyla A. Munoz, Defendant-Appellant, Flushing Savings Bank, et al., Defendants.
Lonuzzi & Woodland, LLP, Brooklyn (John Lonuzzi of counsel), for appellant.
Hogan Lovells US LLP, New York (Chava Brandriss of counsel), for respondent.
Upon transfer from the Second Department, order, Supreme Court, Kings County (Debra Silber, J.), entered January 30, 2017, which, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination denying defendant's motion to dismiss the foreclosure complaint and to vacate the order of reference, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
It is undisputed that defendant transferred the subject property to a corporation in 2014. Thus, when she claimed for the first time nearly a year later that she had not been properly served in this action in 2008, she no longer had an interest in the property, and lacked standing to contest the judgment of
foreclosure (see NYCTL 1996-1 Trust v King, 13 AD3d 429, 430 [2d Dept 2004]; Bancplus Mtge. Corp. v Galloway, 203 AD2d 222, 223 [2d Dept 1994]).
We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: FEBRUARY 28, 2019
CLERK
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2019 NY Slip Op 1489 (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Munoz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.