Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Munoz

2019 NY Slip Op 1489
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 28, 2019
Docket8541 30527/08
StatusPublished

This text of 2019 NY Slip Op 1489 (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Munoz) 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
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Munoz, 2019 NY Slip Op 1489 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Munoz (2019 NY Slip Op 01489)
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.


Decided on February 28, 2019
Friedman, J.P., Kapnick, Webber, Oing, Singh, JJ.

8541 30527/08

[*1]Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Plaintiff-Respondent,

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

Related

NYCTL 1996-1 Trust v. King
13 A.D.3d 429 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Bancplus Mortgage Corp. v. Galloway
203 A.D.2d 222 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 NY Slip Op 1489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-fargo-bank-na-v-munoz-nyappdiv-2019.