From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

SRMOF II 2012-I Trust v. Tella

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 26, 2016
139 A.D.3d 599 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

381099/12, 1265N, 1264N.

05-26-2016

SRMOF II 2012–I TRUST, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent–Appellant, v. Mercy I. TELLA, etc., Defendant–Appellant–Respondent, City of New York Environmental Control Board, et al., Defendants.

Biolsi Law Group P.C., New York (Steven A. Biolsi of counsel), for appellant-respondent. The Law Offices of Charles Wallshein, Melville (Charles W. Marino of counsel), and Stiene & Associates, P.C., Huntington (Charles W. Marino of counsel), for respondent-appellant.


Biolsi Law Group P.C., New York (Steven A. Biolsi of counsel), for appellant-respondent.

The Law Offices of Charles Wallshein, Melville (Charles W. Marino of counsel), and Stiene & Associates, P.C., Huntington (Charles W. Marino of counsel), for respondent-appellant.

MAZZARELLI, J.P., ANDRIAS, RICHTER, MANZANET–DANIELS, KAHN, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered September 9, 2014, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff's motion for a default judgment, and order, same court and Justice, entered September 22, 2015, which denied plaintiff's motion to remove defendant Mercy Tella as a necessary party to this action, and proceed without her, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff's excuse for its delay in moving for a default judgment indicates that there was activity well within the one-year period specified in CPLR 3215(c) (see Pappoe v. Custodio, 156 A.D.2d 211, 548 N.Y.S.2d 472 [1st Dept.1989] ). Defendant Tella offers no excuse for her default in answering the complaint, and her attempt to challenge the sufficiency of the documents underlying plaintiff's motion for a default judgment is unpreserved and in any event unavailing. Plaintiff's proof of service, the summons and complaint, and Tella's default in answering when served with process, in conjunction with “[the] affidavit of merit by the current loan servicer/assignee of the note and mortgage, who averred facts which constitute cognizable claims for foreclosure and sale against the obligor/mortgagor defendant[ ],” are sufficient to support plaintiff's motion (BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP v. Betram, 51 Misc.3d 770, 783–784, 30 N.Y.S.3d 483 [Sup.Ct., Suffolk County 2016] ; see also HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Spitzer, 131 A.D.3d 1206, 18 N.Y.S.3d 67 [2d Dept.2015] ).

Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that it waived its right to assert a deficiency judgment against Tella, and, thus, failed to establish that Tella is not a necessary or indispensable party who can be severed from these proceedings (see Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v. Connelly, 84 A.D.2d 805, 805, 444 N.Y.S.2d 147 [2d Dept.1981] ).


Summaries of

SRMOF II 2012-I Trust v. Tella

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 26, 2016
139 A.D.3d 599 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

SRMOF II 2012-I Trust v. Tella

Case Details

Full title:SRMOF II 2012–I TRUST, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent–Appellant, v. Mercy I…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: May 26, 2016

Citations

139 A.D.3d 599 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
33 N.Y.S.3d 25
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 4100

Citing Cases

U.S. Bank v. Rahimi

A plaintiff needs "only [to] allege enough facts to enable a court to determine that a viable cause of action…

U.S. Bank Tr. v. Duggal

A plaintiff needs "only [to] allege enough facts to enable a court to determine that a viable cause of action…