Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Oyenuga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Oyenuga

2017 NY Slip Op 8710, 156 A.D.3d 743, 64 N.Y.S.3d 905, 2017 WL 6347036

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 13, 2017

Docket2015-06670

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 8710 (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Oyenuga) 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. Oyenuga, 2017 NY Slip Op 8710, 156 A.D.3d 743, 64 N.Y.S.3d 905, 2017 WL 6347036 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from stated portions of a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bunyan, J.), dated March 12, 2015. The judgment, inter alia, confirmed a referee’s report and directed the sale of the subject premises.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

“ ‘An appellant who perfects an appeal by using the appendix method must file an appendix that contains all the relevant portions of the record in order to enable the court to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal’ ” (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Limtung, 151 AD3d 1114, 1115 [2017], quoting Gandolfi v Gandolfi, 66 AD3d 834, 835 [2009]; see NYCTL 1998-1 Trust v Shahipour, 29 AD3d 965 [2006]; Patel v Patel, 270 AD2d 241 [2000]). “The appendix shall contain those portions of the record necessary to permit the court to fully consider the issues which will be raised by the appellant and the respondent” (22 NYCRR 670.10.2 [c] [1]; see CPLR 5528 [a] [5]; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Limtung, 151 AD3d at 1115; Deshuk-Flores v Flores, 116 AD3d 996 [2014]).

In this mortgage foreclosure action, the defendant Modupe Oyenuga appeals from a judgment of foreclosure and sale, raising issues, inter alia, regarding service of the summons and complaint and the plaintiff’s delay in moving for a default judgment. Oyenuga perfected the appeal by using the appendix method, but he did not include in the appendix the note and mortgage, the summons and complaint, the plaintiff’s motions for a default judgment and a judgment of foreclosure and sale, and all of the Supreme Court’s prior orders. The omission of these documents renders it impossible to determine any of the Oyenuga’s claims. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed (see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Limtung, 151 AD3d at 1115).

Mastro, J.P., Sgroi, Cohen and Maltese, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from stated portions of a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bunyan, J.), dated March 12, 2015. The judgment, inter alia, confirmed a referee’s report and directed the sale of the subject premises.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

“ ‘An appellant who perfects an appeal by using the appendix method must file an appendix that contains all the relevant portions of the record in order to enable the court to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal’ ” (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Limtung, 151 AD3d 1114, 1115 [2017], quoting Gandolfi v Gandolfi, 66 AD3d 834, 835 [2009]; see NYCTL 1998-1 Trust v Shahipour, 29 AD3d 965 [2006]; Patel v Patel, 270 AD2d 241 [2000]). “The appendix shall contain those portions of the record necessary to permit the court to fully consider the issues which will be raised by the appellant and the respondent” (22 NYCRR 670.10.2 [c] [1]; see CPLR 5528 [a] [5]; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Limtung, 151 AD3d at 1115; Deshuk-Flores v Flores, 116 AD3d 996 [2014]).

In this mortgage foreclosure action, the defendant Modupe Oyenuga appeals from a judgment of foreclosure and sale, raising issues, inter alia, regarding service of the summons and complaint and the plaintiff’s delay in moving for a default judgment. Oyenuga perfected the appeal by using the appendix method, but he did not include in the appendix the note and mortgage, the summons and complaint, the plaintiff’s motions for a default judgment and a judgment of foreclosure and sale, and all of the Supreme Court’s prior orders. The omission of these documents renders it impossible to determine any of the Oyenuga’s claims. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed (see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Limtung, 151 AD3d at 1115).

Mastro, J.P., Sgroi, Cohen and Maltese, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 8710, 156 A.D.3d 743, 64 N.Y.S.3d 905, 2017 WL 6347036, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-fargo-bank-na-v-oyenuga-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack