Capital One v. Ludden

12 Citing cases

  1. SYCP, LLC v. Evans

    217 A.D.3d 707 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)   Cited 11 times

    The plaintiff appeals. An action to foreclose a mortgage is governed by a six-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 213[4] ; Capital One, N.A. v. Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 144 N.Y.S.3d 95 ). "[E]ven if a mortgage is payable in installments, once a mortgage debt is accelerated, the entire amount is due and the Statute of Limitations begins to run on the entire debt" ( Capital One, N.A. v. Ludden, 192 A.D.3d at 752–753, 144 N.Y.S.3d 95 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeCitimortgage, Inc. v. Ford, 186 A.D.3d 1609, 129 N.Y.S.3d 837 ).

  2. U.S. Bank v. Scully

    203 A.D.3d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

    The defendant appeals. "On a defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiff's alleged lack of standing, the burden is on the moving defendant to establish, prima facie, the plaintiff's lack of standing as a matter of law" ( Capital One, N.A. v. Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 753, 144 N.Y.S.3d 95 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeWells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Smith, 197 A.D.3d 532, 533, 153 N.Y.S.3d 42 ; Arch Bay Holdings, LLC–Series 2010B v. Smith, 136 A.D.3d 719, 719, 24 N.Y.S.3d 533 ). A plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure action has standing when, at the time the action was commenced, it was either the holder or the assignee of the underlying note (seeAurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Taylor, 25 N.Y.3d 355, 361–362, 12 N.Y.S.3d 612, 34 N.E.3d 363 ).

  3. U.S. Bank v. Scully

    2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 1340 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)

    The defendant appeals. "On a defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiff's alleged lack of standing, the burden is on the moving defendant to establish, prima facie, the plaintiff's lack of standing as a matter of law" (Capital One, N.A. v Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 753 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Smith, 197 A.D.3d 532, 533; Arch Bay Holdings, LLC-Series 2010B v Smith, 136 A.D.3d 719, 719). A plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure action has standing when, at the time the action was commenced, it was either the holder or the assignee of the underlying note (see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor, 25 N.Y.3d 355, 361-362).

  4. U.S. Bank v. Marrero

    221 A.D.3d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)   Cited 4 times

    The Supreme Court also properly determined that the defendant failed to establish the plaintiff's lack of standing. "On a defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiff's alleged lack of standing, the burden is on the moving defendant to establish, prima facie, the plaintiff's lack of standing as a matter of law" ( Capital One, N.A. v. Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 753, 144 N.Y.S.3d 95 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeArch Bay Holdings, LLC–Series 2010B v. Smith, 136 A.D.3d 719, 719, 24 N.Y.S.3d 533 ). A plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure action has standing when, at the time the action was commenced, it was either the holder or the assignee of the underlying note (seeAurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Taylor, 25 N.Y.3d 355, 361–362, 12 N.Y.S.3d 612, 34 N.E.3d 363 ).

  5. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. v. Sampson

    2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 2344 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)

    Mortgage foreclosure actions are governed by a six-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 213[4]; Capital One, N.A. v Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 752). "[E]ven if a mortgage is payable in installments, once a mortgage debt is accelerated, the entire amount is due and the Statute of Limitations begins to run on the entire debt" (Capital One, N.A. v Ludden, 192 A.D.3d at 752-753 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Citimortgage, Inc. v Ford, 186 A.D.3d 1609, 1609).

  6. Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc'y, FSB v. Heampstead Prop. Ventures II, LLC

    205 A.D.3d 843 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)   Cited 4 times

    The plaintiff appeals. Mortgage foreclosure actions are governed by a six-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 213[4] ; Capital One, N.A. v. Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 752, 144 N.Y.S.3d 95 ). "The law is well settled that, even if a mortgage is payable in installments, once a mortgage debt is accelerated, the entire amount is due and the Statute of Limitations begins to run on the entire debt"

  7. Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy. v. Heampstead Prop. Ventures II

    2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 3142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

    Mortgage foreclosure actions are governed by a six-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 213[4]; Capital One, N.A. v Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 752). "The law is well settled that, even if a mortgage is payable in installments, once a mortgage debt is accelerated, the entire amount is due and the Statute of Limitations begins to run on the entire debt" (Capital One, N.A. v Ludden, 192 A.D.3d at 752-753 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Citimortgage, Inc. v Ford, 186 A.D.3d 1609, 1609).

  8. CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Rogers

    203 A.D.3d 1125 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)   Cited 6 times

    RPAPL 1302–a provides that, notwithstanding the provisions of CPLR 3211(e), "any objection or defense based on the plaintiff's lack of standing in a foreclosure proceeding related to a home loan ... shall not be waived if a defendant fails to raise the objection or defense in a responsive pleading or pre-answer motion to dismiss" (seeU.S. Bank N.A. v. Blake–Hovanec, 191 A.D.3d 821, 825, 142 N.Y.S.3d 556 ; GMAC Mtge., LLC v. Coombs, 191 A.D.3d 37, 136 N.Y.S.3d 439 ). "On a defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiff's alleged lack of standing, the burden is on the moving defendant to establish, prima facie, the plaintiff's lack of standing as a matter of law" ( Capital One, N.A. v. Ludden, 192 A.D.3d 752, 753, 144 N.Y.S.3d 95 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeWilmington Sav. Fund Socy., FSB v. Matamoro, 200 A.D.3d 79, 89, 156 N.Y.S.3d 323 ). Here, in support of his motion to dismiss, the defendant failed to submit any evidence, and thus, failed to meet his burden to establish the plaintiff's lack of standing as a matter of law (seeDeutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams. v. Vitellas, 131 A.D.3d 52, 60, 13 N.Y.S.3d 163 ).

  9. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Smith

    197 A.D.3d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)   Cited 4 times

    Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the defendant did not waive a standing defense pursuant to CPLR 3211(e) by virtue of her failure to raise it in an answer or a pre-answer motion to dismiss (seeGMAC Mtge., LLC v. Coombs, 191 A.D.3d 37, 46, 49, 136 N.Y.S.3d 439 ; see also RPAPL 1302–a ). "On a defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiff's alleged lack of standing, the burden is on the moving defendant to establish, prima facie, the plaintiff's lack of standing as a matter of law" ( Capital One, N.A. v. Ludden 192 A.D.3d 752, 753, 144 N.Y.S.3d 95 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeArch Bay Holdings, LLC–Series 2010B v. Smith, 136 A.D.3d 719, 719, 24 N.Y.S.3d 533 ). A plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure action has standing when, at the time the action was commenced, it was either the holder or the assignee of the underlying note (seeAurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Taylor, 25 N.Y.3d 355, 361–362, 12 N.Y.S.3d 612, 34 N.E.3d 363 ). "Either a written assignment of the underlying note or the physical delivery of the note prior to the commencement of the foreclosure action is sufficient to transfer the obligation" ( U.S. Bank N.A. v. 22 S. Madison, LLC, 170 A.D.3d 772, 773–774, 95 N.Y.S.3d 264 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeDeutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Schmelzinger, 189 A.D.3d 1173, 1174, 138 N.Y.S.3d 540 ). "To defeat a defendant's motion, the plaintiff has no burden of establishing its standing as a matter of law; rather, the motion will be defeated if the plaintiff's submissions raise a question of fact as to its standi

  10. Wells Fargo Bank v. Smith

    No. 2017-11314 (N.Y. App. Div. Aug. 4, 2021)

    "On a defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiff's alleged lack of standing, the burden is on the moving defendant to establish, prima facie, the plaintiff's lack of standing as a matter of law" (Capital One, N.A. v Ludden 192 A.D.3d 752, 753 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Arch Bays Holdings, LLC-Series 2010B v Smith, 136 A.D.3d 719, 719). A plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure action has standing when, at the time the action was commenced, it was either the holder or the assignee of the underlying note (see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor, 25 N.Y.3d 355, 361-362).