Ponce De Leon Fed. Bank v Kapan 2014 NY Sp Op 32138(U) August 14, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 810277/11 Judge: Joan A. Madden Cases posted wth a "30000" dentfer,.e., 2013 NY Sp Op 30001(U), are repubshed from varous state and oca government webstes. These ncude the New York State Unfed Court Systems E-Courts Servce, and the Bronx County Cerks offce. Ths opnon s uncorrected and not seected for offca pubcaton.
[* 1] SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF.. N.. NEWYdRK.COUNTY HO.JOAN A. MADDEN. J.S.C. + ndex Number: 810277/2011 PONCE DE LEON FEDERAL BANK vs. KAPLAN, MARY E. SEQUENCENUMBER:001 SUMMARY JUDGMENT Justce ;<._ PART /. fttdexno. ----- MOTON DATE ~- MOTO.N SEQ. NO. ---. T;9 ~f()f~wng pap,~rs. nurn.bered 1 ~o ~, re re~~"~wfr9tj:nt~to_ _...,.,.._-..,...,.-----...,.,...,--;-------+-- ~(.;~e;.of Mot<>~Or.dtr to Show Cau~e -.Affdavts--:. ~h~~: _. \.._._.....;...,.-...;..--~,.._ ~t~); >""~.~.t;,rj~~ffdayts - Exhbts ---,-...,..,....,....._...,._,......,...,...,.._-+ ~{ ~(,).---------.YJfg.Affdavfts.... ~<>(.).----~- ~ctheforeg~mg.papers\ ts orde-that<th~ m~.tl....njs ~. : ~. ~ ~ { ~~.... -f;w_,. ~~ ~~~ ~. ~L-.. =.. ~~ ;,;.y. ":::. --. 1:.-~ ~.. : 0 MON~FNAt. :OSPOSTON. GRA.ES~ PART d OTHER 0 SUBMT ORDER.. :P,Q~?"NfaNT. 0 REfJ~tR8NCE.
[* 2] SJPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK qounty OF NEW YORK: PART 11 _j )( PONCE DE LEON FEDERAL BANK, Pantft~ -aganst- NDExJNO. 810277/ MARYE. KAPLAN, BOARD OF MANAGERS OF PARC VENDOME CONDOMNUM, NEW YORK STATE fjepartment OF TAXATON AND FNANCE, NEW YORK CTY PARKNG VOLATONS SUREAU, NEW YORK CTY TRANST ADJUDCATON ~UREAU, NEW YORK CTY ENVRONMENTAL CONTROL ~OARD, UNTED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY rt4ternal REVENUE SERVCE, and "JOHN DOE" #1-10, "MARY DOE" #1-10, and "JANE DOE" #1-10, the names beng fcttous, ther true names beng unknown to pantff~ persons ntended beng persons n possesson of portons of the premses descrbed n the compant n ths acton, Defendants. -~---------------------------------------------------------------------------X.rpAN A. MADDEN, J.: Ths an acton to forecose on a mortgage on condomnum Unt 9A, ht the Pare Vendomc Condomnum, 353 West 56th Street, New York, New York. 1 Pantff move$ for an order: 1) strkng the answer of defendant Mary E. Kapan and grantng pantff sum11ary judgment ag,anst defendant Kapan; 2) amendng the capton of the summons and compant, the notce of pend ency and a other papers fed n ths acton by dscontnung the acton aganst "John Doc" /P-10, "Mary Doe" 1-10, and "Jane Doc"# 1-1 O; and 3) appontng a refere to ascertan and compute the amount due under the mortgage. Defendant Kapan opposes th~ moton. 1 Pantff has another acton aganst defendant Kapan to forecose 01~ a separate mortgage qn another apartment, Unt 9B, n the same budng, Ponce de Leon Federa Bank v. Kapan, hdex No. 810320111 (Sup Ct, NY Co). Pantff s aso movng for summarhudgment n that. aet1on.
[* 3]. n movng for summary judgment n a mortgage forecosure acton, pjantff estabshes a / p~ma face rght to forecose by producng the mortgage, the assgnment, f a~1y, the unpad note 1 m~d evdence of defaut. See CtFmmca Co. (DE) v. McKnney, 27 AD3d k24 ( st Dept 2006); LpP Mortgage. Ltd v. Card Corp, 17 AD3d 103 (1st Dept). v app den, 6 NY~d 702 (2005); Bank of Amerca. N.A. v. Tatham, 305 AD2d 183 (1st Dept 2003). Once pantff ~atsfes that burden, t s ncumbent on the pay opposng forecosure to come forward wth evdejnce suffcent to rctse a trabe ssue of fact as to a bona fde defense such as waver, estoppc,bad fath, fraud, or. oppressve or unconsconabe conduct on the part of pantff. See Nassau Tr1ust Co v. Montrose, Concrete Products CorQ., 56 NY2d 175, reargmt den 57 NY2d 674 (1982);.q1Fnanca Co (DE ; vj McKnney, supra; Mahopac Natona Bank v. Basey, 244 AD2d 466 (2 11 ct U)ept 1997), v app dsm 91 NY2d 1003 (1998). Pantff has estabshed ts prma face enttement to judgment as a atter of aw by producng the note, the mortgage, the assgnment of the mortgage and evde11ce of the defendant Kapans defaut. See CtFnanca Co. Q)E) v. McKnney, supra; LPP Mort~age, Ltd v. Card Gorp, supra; Bank of Amerca, N.A. v. Tatham, s_ypra. Pantffs submts an affdavt statng t~at defendant Kapan "faed to make a of the reguar monthy payments d~1e as of May 1,. 2o 11," and that "no payments n reducton of or on account of [the] prncpa~ sum, or on account. of the nterest thereon, have been made snce the commencement of ths act~n." n opposng pantffs moton, defendant Kapan does not deny that honey s owed, or - that she defauted on the mortgage. Rather, defendant Kapan submts an af$davt assertng that: 1:) pantff dd not ncude the requred RP APL 1303 notce whe1 "purportng to serve the ~urnmons and compant, as the "notce ncuded wth the papers that were dtvered contaned a 2
[* 4] n~tce prnted on whte paper" and the "type was smaer that the requred sde and uncear from a~parenty beng coped many tmes"; 2) the subject property, a resdenta gondomnum unt," s not an "nvestment property" as aeged n the compant, as t s "occupe~ by my reatve, there s not ease agreement and do not coect rent," so accordng to defendant, a "RP APL 302... nptce to cure was requred to be served"; 3) the amount camed to be due mtd owng s qcorrect; 4) pantff states "no bass for the Court to strke my answer." 1 Defendant Kapans frst asserton s based on her ffth affrmatve dtjf:ense that pantff pas not comped wth RP APL 1303." Secton 1303 requres servce of a t1andated notce wth, te summons and compant. See Aurora Loan Servces, LLC v. Wesburn, 85 AD3d 95 (2 11 d ~ept 2011 ). The statute prescrbes the content and form of the notce and th method of servce. PAPL 1303; see Deutsche Bank Natona Trust Co v. Spanos, 102 AD3d p09 (2 11 d Dept), app c~sm 21 NY3d 1068 (2013). Proper servce of a RP APL 1303 notce a c01jdton precedent to the commencement of a forecosure acton, and pantff has the burden of e*abshng s~tsfact 011 of ths cond t 011. See Aurora Loan Servces. LLC v. W esb um,1 supra. Hence, f the condton s not satsfed, the compant must be dsmssed. See d; Frst Naona Bank of ; (J:.hcago v. Sver, 73 AD3d 162 (2"d Dept 2010). Here, pantff has made a suffcent showng that t satsfed the con~ton precedent of propery servng the RPAPL 1303 notce on defendant Kapan at the comntncement of ths <cton, by submttng an affdavt of servce from the process server that the ~ummons and compant was personay devered to defondant Kapan on November 11, 2p J 1 at 3 :24 p.m. at t G6 Morton Street, New York, New York, aong wth an "Addtona Notce, jhep For r<hncowners n Forecosure, on coored paper n compance wth RP APL ~ect 1303 served 3
[* 5] therewth." Notaby, the summons and compant fed wth Court contans 11e RP APL 1303 notce wth the statutory-requred content, ceary prnted n the requred ty1* sze on yeow \ aj.d orange paper. See Aurora Loan Servces, LLC v. Wcsbm,.~.uprn at OP. n vew of the foregong, defendant Kapans objectons to the form of the secton 1303 notfe are nsu1cent ta rase a matera ssue as to pantffs compance wth R.PAPL 1303. Se$ US Bank Natona Ajssocaton V. Tate, 102 AD23d 859 (2 11 d Dept 2013). ) Defendant Kapans second asserton s based on her fouth affrmat~c defense that pfantff has not comped wth RP APL ~ 1302(1 )." Secton 1302(1) rcqurck a compant n a t forecosure acton nvovng "hgh-cost home oan or a subprme home oan,f to contan certan a\egatons, ncudng an aegaton that pantff has comped wth RPAPL ~1304. Whe s cton 1304 requres a borrower to serve a mandated notce 90 days pror tothe commcncemem of a forecosure acton, that provson s appcabe ony where the property+ condomnum unt at ssue s "used or occuped, or ntended to be used or occuped whoy or party, as the home or.. r~sdence of one or more persons and whch s or w be occuped by the bo+ower as the dorrower sprncpa dweng" (emphass added). Herc, regardess ofw1ehcr Kapans rndomnum unt s an "nvestment property," she admts n her affdavt th~t the unt s occuped by her "reatve." Snce Kapan submts no evdence showng that she occupes the unt ; <S her "prncpa dweng," the 90-day notce requrement of RP APL 1304 js nappcabe, and J1antfwas not requred to compy wth the peadng and notce requrcme1ts ofrpapl, 1302 and 1304. Defendant Kapans addtona objecton to the amount camed as d~e and owng s not a 4<.:tensc, but rather a matter for the referee apponted to cktermne the amo111t due and owng on 4 j
[* 6]. 1c mortgage. Sec Mortgage Eectronc Rcf<traton Systems, nc v. Schuh, ts AD3d 838 (3" *pt), app dsmssed 10 NY3d 951 (2008); Lonu, sand Savngs Bank ofce1{tereach._f.s.b. v. f ~nkensohn, 222 AD2d 659 (2 11 d Dept 1995). r Based on the foregong, defendant Kapan has faed to rase a mater~ ssue of fact as to am avaabe deknse. Pantff therefore, entted to summary judgment, a1\d pantffs moton ~ granted n ts entrety. t J 1 Sette order on notce whch ncudes a provson for the appontment( of a Referee to qompute. qated: August ENJER: 5