Case ID: ad3d_140/html/0832-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rudolf Kats, Doing Business as Columbia Capital Co., Respondent, v Throop and Gates, Inc., Appellant, and Capital L. Holdings, LLC, Intervenor-Respondent, et al., Defendants.
    [31 NYS3d 899]
   In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Throop and Gates, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), dated June 11, 2014, which denied its motion, inter alia, to stay the foreclosure sale of the subject premises.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the appellant’s motion, inter alia, to stay the foreclosure sale of the subject premises (see 22 NYCRR 202.7 [f]; CPLR 321 [a]; BiLello v Genesis Seafood, Inc., 28 AD3d 412, 412 [2006]). Moreover, contrary to the appellant’s contention, the plaintiff was not required to cancel the auction at which the subject premises were to be sold upon being informed, just before it was scheduled to commence, that the appellant intended to seek judicial relief with respect to the subject premises ipf. Bank of N.Y. v Yosi Shem-Tov, 109 AD3d 857, 858 [2013]).

Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Hinds-Radix and Connolly, JJ., concur.