Wells Fargo Bank, National Ass'n v. DeSouza

126 A.D.3d 965, 3 N.Y.S.3d 619
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 25, 2015
Docket2014-04209
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 126 A.D.3d 965 (Wells Fargo Bank, National Ass'n v. DeSouza) 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, National Ass'n v. DeSouza, 126 A.D.3d 965, 3 N.Y.S.3d 619 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Garvin DeSouza appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Martin, J.), dated March 10, 2014, as granted those branches of the plaintiffs motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against him and to appoint a referee.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this foreclosure action by producing the mortgage, the unpaid note, and evidence of the appellant’s default in payment (see One W. Bank, FSB v DiPilato, 124 AD3d 735 [2015]; Peak Fin. Partners, Inc. v Brook, 119 AD3d 539 [2014]; Emigrant Mtge. Co., Inc. v Beckerman, 105 AD3d 895 [2013]). In opposition, the appellant failed to submit evidence in admissible form sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to a bona fide defense (see Independence Bank v Valentine, 113 AD3d 62 [2013]; Baron Assoc., LLC v Garcia Group Enters., Inc., 96 AD3d 793 [2012]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the plaintiffs motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the appellant and to appoint a referee (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are improperly raised for the first time on appeal.

Mastro, J.R, Chambers, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Related

UMB Bank, N.A. v. Taif Devs. L.L.C.
2026 NY Slip Op 30619(U) (New York Supreme Court, Queens County, 2026)
Pennymac, Corp. v. DiPrima
54 Misc. 3d 990 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)
PNC Bank, National Ass'n v. Campbell
142 A.D.3d 1148 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Dyer Trust 2012-1 v. Global World Realty, Inc.
140 A.D.3d 827 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Burke
52 Misc. 3d 944 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)
LaSalle Bank, N.A. v. Zaks
138 A.D.3d 788 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Zarabi v. Movahedian
136 A.D.3d 895 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP v. Bertram
51 Misc. 3d 770 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)
LNV Corp. v. Francois
134 A.D.3d 1071 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Ass'n v. Mantle
134 A.D.3d 903 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
YMJ Meserole, LLC v. 98 Meserole Street, LLC
133 A.D.3d 848 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Prompt Mortgage Providers of North America, LLC v. Singh
132 A.D.3d 833 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Schott
130 A.D.3d 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Loancare v. Firshing
130 A.D.3d 787 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. 254 Church Street, LLC
129 A.D.3d 650 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
126 A.D.3d 965, 3 N.Y.S.3d 619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-fargo-bank-national-assn-v-desouza-nyappdiv-2015.