From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wells Fargo Bank v. Santos

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 10, 2021
192 A.D.3d 851 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

2018–14162 Index No. 1199/12

03-10-2021

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., etc., appellant, v. Tasha SANTOS, etc., et al., respondents, et al., defendants.

Davidson Fink LLP, Rochester, N.Y. (Richard N. Franco of counsel), for appellant. Pacheco & Lugo, PLLC., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Carmen A. Pacheco and Betty Lugo of counsel), for respondents.


Davidson Fink LLP, Rochester, N.Y. (Richard N. Franco of counsel), for appellant.

Pacheco & Lugo, PLLC., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Carmen A. Pacheco and Betty Lugo of counsel), for respondents.

LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mark I. Partnow, J.), dated September 20, 2018. The order, insofar as appealed from, directed a hearing to determine whether the defendants Tasha Santos, Felix R. Santos, Jr., and Thomas Santos were validly served with process.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal from so much of the order as directed a hearing to determine the validity of service of process on the defendants Tasha Santos, Felix R. Santos, Jr., and Thomas Santos must be dismissed. The challenged portion of the order merely directs a judicial hearing to aid in the disposition of a motion and does not affect a substantial right. Therefore, it is not appealable as of right (see CPLR 5701[a][2][v] ; Bank of N.Y. v. Segui, 120 A.D.3d 1369, 1370, 993 N.Y.S.2d 330 ; Youngquist v. Youngquist, 44 A.D.3d 1034, 1035, 845 N.Y.S.2d 787 ; Leonard v. Bishop, 220 A.D.2d 723, 633 N.Y.S.2d 79 ), and leave to appeal has not been granted.

The plaintiff's contention regarding its motion, inter alia, for leave to enter a default judgment against the defendants Tasha Santos, Felix R. Santos, Jr., and Thomas Santos and for an order of reference is not properly before us, as the motion remains pending and undecided (see Katz v. Katz, 68 A.D.2d 536, 418 N.Y.S.2d 99 ).

AUSTIN, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, CONNOLLY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Wells Fargo Bank v. Santos

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 10, 2021
192 A.D.3d 851 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Wells Fargo Bank v. Santos

Case Details

Full title:Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., etc., appellant, v. Tasha Santos, etc., et al.…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Mar 10, 2021

Citations

192 A.D.3d 851 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 1441
139 N.Y.S.3d 857

Citing Cases

OneWest Bank FSB v. Perla

However, even assuming that the plaintiff is correct that the order appealed from constitutes a "judgment"…

OneWest Bank FSB v. Perla

However, even assuming that the plaintiff is correct that the order appealed from constitutes a "judgment"…