Court Opinion

ID: 9959925
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-12 20:12:33.890061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:59.880249
License: Public Domain

Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Retemiah
               2024 NY Slip Op 31153(U)
                      April 5, 2024
             Supreme Court, Kings County
          Docket Number: Index No. 4843/10
               Judge: Lawrence Knipel
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
  York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                       publication.
                                                                                                                                          INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

                                                                                                 At an..JAS Term., Part FRP 3' of the Supreme
                                                                                                 Court ofthe State_ofNe»' York,_held in and for
                                                                                                 the County:ofKings:, at the.C0i.ltthouse, at Civic

                                                                                                ;:,:Jo~
                                                                                                 Center, Brooklyn, New York, on tbe ~ d.11y .·o f

                                                                                                                                          ~
                    I:ION. LAWREN.CE KNIPEL,
                                                          .                   Justic_e.
                    - - - - - - - - .,. "' - -.- - - -.- -- - - - _.,. - - - - ·-· ---~ - - •. - - -X
                N ATIONSTAR.MORTOAGEi LLC,·

                                                                              Plaintiff;

                                          - against-                                                               Index No. 4843_/.1 0

                PAUL RET8MIAI\ JPMORGAN .CHASE BANK :tldME
                E.QUITY ANO CQN.SUMERLENDING ·D!VJSJON,
                JPMORGAN CHASE BANK svcCBSSOR BY-MJ;RGER
                To WASHINGTON MUTUALBANK,2364A
                PROP~RTfES CORPOR;ATION, Jo.HN°R~Tf;M[AH,
                NOREEN RETEMiAH, NYREE RETEMlAH,

                                                                         Def~ndant,s.
                - - - - - :- :- - - - ·- -- - - - - - - - - - -.-~ - - - - - - - -,- - - -X

                The following e-filed papers read herein:.                                                        NYSCEF Doc Nos.

            Notice of Motion/Order tp Show Cause/
            Petition/Cross Motion and
            MTtdavits (Af:firmati6ns)_ _ _ _ _ _ __                                                              . 58-91
            Oppo~ition Affidavits (Affim1ations) _ _ __                                                            93-95

                              Upon the foi;egoing paper.s in this action to forecfose a mottg_age on the property at

            23(>4 AtJantic Avenue. in Brooklyn (~fock 1436, tot 23-24) (Property), defendant 23"64A

            Properties· Corporation (2364A Properties) moves (in..1:notion seq1,.1ence [m.ot. seq.feigh.t),

            by order to show cause (OSC), for an order:: (1) v'<;1cating the Marth 4, 2042 order of

            reference and the June lS, 2023.Juclgment nf foreclosure and sale entered on default.in this

                1
            •   fime.,.barted adi_ol),"pursuant to.CPLR 3.1 Tand CPLR5.0l5 (a) (1) and/or CPLR.-5015 (a)

                                                                                          1 of 10
[* 1]
                                                                                                        INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

             (4); (2) granting it leave to. fiie a late answer to the complaint, pursuant to CPLR 3012 (d),

             aµd'then dismissing !his action, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5); and (3) directing the kings

            Gqunty Clerk·to carn;:el the Noth:;e of Pend~ncy fil'cd -against the Property when this east-

            was dismissed and 2364A Properties l9oktitle to the Property, pursuantto CPLR(i514 (a)

            or (b) (see NYSCEFDoc No. 91). 1

                                                      ,B'a-ckground

                    On FCbnia~y 25, 201-0~ pl_aintiffNationstar·M01:tgage, LLC-(Natio.nstar)-comrnenced-

            th.iS residentia't foredosute action a:gai.nst. tlie borrower, Paul Rete~niah (Retemiah or

            .Borrower- Defendant);, and. others by .ti.ling a_ Sllminons, a coinp1aint ·and a notice of

            pep._dency against the Property. The· complaint alleg_es thatt>rt or about August 31, 2006

            Retemial.i execute_d a $'350,UOO.OO· mortgage encurnherin_g the Property ·and. that he·

            defaulted.    Ori March 26, 20 LO, Retemiah answered. the .complaint and denied the

            ·aUegations• the'rein. 2 The parties paiticipate_d)nJpaildatocy- settlement cqnferencing .

                    .On January 2.8)·2014,. ·after this action lai_d dormant for·years, this cqurt hel_d.a status

            conference and_ issued a c.ondttional order of dismissal (2014' Conditional Order pf

            Dismissal) _prtivid!ng that "this action i_s. dis_misse_d·pursµant to CFLR 3-2lti·and the. County

            C]etk is "directed to c:anccl the Notice of Pendcncy tmless- Plaintiff files a-note_. of.issue or

            otherwise_proceeds by motion for eritfy of judgment within 90 days frop:1 the date hereof."

             ! The co.urtgranted_Defendant bwne,r a temporary .restraining ·order (TRO)'st~yihg·and enjofoii;ig
             plaintiffNatiolJstar Mortgage.LLC (Nation.star) from mt~~io_ntng or se_lling the Property·pending
             th~·determinati_on of this. motion (i.d..).
            · ·on January -23 ,. 2015 1 Retemiah aniehded '1.is _answer-to ass~rt affimiative-defonses.
            2

                                                             2

                                                           2 of 10
[* 2]
                                                                                                      INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

            Nationstar failed to ·ptocced.. within 90 days;_ and thuS;_ the actfort was aPrili,n"is~ratively

                    Oq. Jun<_! 22, 20l8, Natiot\star mbved, by-·o'rder to show cause, to vacate the 2014

             Condit1onal OrQe_r of Dismis•sal and. tCi restot~ this ac(ion ·.ro th!:l c¢urt's active ,c~lendar.

            Defendant Retemiah cross-rhoved to disniiss the complaint, pursuant to C.PLR 3211.(1:l) (1)

            and (a) (5). By a Dccembcr17, 2018 decision and order; this court granted Nationsfat's•

            motion, restored the a_ction to "the,actiye·c_alendar -an_d denied Retemiah1 s cross. motion.

                    Oh January 11,. 2019, two ,v:e_eks aft.et the action was restored, t□- the calendar,

            Natfonstar filed-a successive notice Ofpertdency again_:st the Property.

                    Rete:miah apBealed:from this court-'s December 21,.·2018 d_cctsion·--and order. ~:Y ~

            JUne2, 2021 decision.and order, iheAppellateD{vision, SCc.ond.Department, affirmedthis-

            court's December27, .'.20.18
                                    .    decision.and order and held tha:t:
                                                 '   ·,

                                  "  He1'ei the con4itional order: .of" diSmissal, Which, in
                                      0

                           efte-ct, _served as a 90."'.day notice pursuaht to CPLR 3-216, wds
                           defective in that it did not state that the plaintiffs fuilure to
                           comply with the deman·d would -serve ·as a basis_· for the
                           S_i_Jpr~rhe Court, on its own motion 1 -to. dismiss tlle actfon for·
                           failure to prosecute (see CPLR 3216 [b] [3J; Cadichon v
                           Facell,, ]8 NY3d at 235-236; HSBC Bank USA NA. v Arias,
                           187 AD3d at I [58;E/ement E, LL_Cv.A//JisonEnters, Inc., 167
                          AD3d at 982).. Further the-record demqnstrates that no such
                          motion was- ever tnade; nof 'J1'il$ there· entry of an .Order (if
                          dismissal.
                                 "Accordingly. the trctiOn was· not properly -dislr,l!Sse.4_
                          pursuant to CPLR 3216 .. :'' (NYSCEF Doc No. 2. at 2
                          [emphasis added]),

                                                            3

                                                          3 of 10
[* 3]
                                                                                                        INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

                    Meanwhile, between-the -expiration o:f'Nationstat's Fe_bruary 25; 2010 n·otice .of

             j:,enden¢y _on Feb.ru_ary· 2,5 1 2013., and Nationstar's- .filing of a new· notice· of pend ency 0.11

             January ll, 2019; Remetiah transferred the Properly to 2364AProperties by a December

             20, 2018 deed (December 2018Deed), which was recorded onJanuary 3, 2019.

                    On or about April I9 1 2019 1 upon learning abOut Reterniah's Property transfer,

            Nattonsta,r m_oved to amend the-.compfa.int to add 2364A Properties· as .a party defendant.

             By a .{une 26,.2019·decision and order, the-.court_(Dear~.J:) granted Nationstar~s ·motion and-
             dfrected that Natioo·star shall Serve 23'64:A-Pn;:iperties:"in accordanc·e with the CPLR.'\

             Nationstar•:s affidavit of serv-ic-e in the-record i:efl_ects:thftt it served 2364A.Prop_ertie~ with

            the supplenwntal summons and the July 6, 2019 amended complaint by ,delivering. two

             copies ofthern to the New York S,ecretary ofState on July 25, 2019.

                    De:Jenda.i:it ~3-64(\._ P~0perties fai16d. tQ an_swer the am.ended complaint or-otherwise

             appear fo this attion.

                    O..r:i April 7-, '2021_, Niitionstar moved for- suimllary- judgment ~n9, ari- order _of

             refere!jce, whic;;h this c_ourt granted on d_efault and without opp'ositio.ti on March 4, 202_2

             (NYSCEF Doc No. 7). On February' 13, 2Q.2~, Natfonstar moved to confirm the.referee~s:

             report of amounts due and for ajudgnient of foreclosure ~d sale.(NYSCEF Doc No. 15).

            This· coµrt granted Nationstar'·s m·otion-and iss4ed a· June 15, 202~ order ·co11firming the

            referee :report and granting a judgment of foreclosure an:d s?le (NYS,CEF Doc No, 45).

            Thereafter, the referee issued a July 23, 2023 Notice of Sale• advising that the Property

            would be sold at public auction on October 26, 2023 (NYSCEF-Doc No. 47).
                                                              4

                                                           4 of 10
[* 4]
                                                                                                           INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                          RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

            D.e/endant2364A Properties; l11sta11t Motion

                       On October 24, 2.023, defendant 2364A Properties moved, by order to show cause,

            for an order: (I) sraying the October.26, 2023 foreclosure auction;3 (2}vacating the lime

             is; 202.3 judgment of foreclosure·-and sale; (3) vacating the March 4, 2022 order of
            reference gtanted on·-defatiit;_ (4).diSmissi_ng th,iS foreclosure:actiori :a:s thne4;nltted~ µursuai).t

             to CPLR 3211 (a) (5); and (5) canceling the notice of pendency filed against the Property

             1
                 'be;c_ause this qase was dism_issed and ppt pending.at thetime..D~fendant[2364A Properties]

            took title to theSubjectRcal Properly" (NY$CEF Doc No. 60 at12).

                       Oefense·counsel asserts that "l.t]hcrc· call be no dispute.: Plail,ltiff Dt,!'Ver]J._roperly

             served o·rders·o,~ motions. upon Defenda:nt thereby rendering· the ·ctiur"t .·J)o-Wedess· and
                                              .

             in~fft;ctive'1 ·because the. papers were ''irnprQptrly .mailed to the. Secretary of State and

             never served upon Defendant" (id, at if1[ 4 and 5 (i]), Defense counsel explains that.2364A

             Propetlics '1\vas not petsonally deliv~red a copy- of the Summons ·and Complaint and ·di4

             not know .of this action In time.lo defend its'elf because pi:0cess,. if sertt from the Secretary

             of stat,e ... "·went to the wrong address because 2364A Properties "was no longer operating
                                                                                         1
             at the addre_Ss drifile with lhe.sepr.etary-ofst1;tte ... " and there was 'an,-incompiete·--addtess

             onfi/e with the Secretary of State ..." (id. at ,r,r 15-16 [emphasis a,lded]). Defense. counsel

             argues that "[b]e.cause Plaintiff never served ~rty 9rders or judgment properly upon

            J By-an October 25; 2023 order, this'coqrf,·stayed the foreclosq.i'e auction.sChedu.led for-October
            26, 2023 (NYSCEF Doc No. 98).

                                                                5

                                                             5 of 10
[* 5]
                                                                                                           INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                          RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

            Defendant with notice of entry_, Defendant is reasonably- excused [frP1:n its ·dC:faµlt] as a

            matter oflaw pursuant to CPGR 3 I 7 and 5015 (a) (I) ... " (id. at ,r 6J. Defense counsel

            :further cla~t_ns th~t the JU:d$ment i's invc;1.li-d. b~c&µse- "Defendar,it purGhased the propert_y at a

            time when there was ho not~ce of pe'hde_ncy. pending, and ha,rm [tom. the Judgtn_e_ht would

            be irreparable and prejudicial if enforced;' (id. at 118).

                    2364A Prop~rties submitted an affidavit frdm Pastor Vivian Grub (Pa~tor Grub\ its

            CbiefExe<;utive OfficeJ.(CEO), who attesfo that its "reasonable excuse''for its appearance

            default is Natioh.star'·s "',P.egligerit pr_oseCt!-tioµ of this action' .. because sh,e was µnaware of

            the. action in 2019 (NYSCBF Doc No .. 61 at ,r,r 17-18). P~stor Grub asserts that "I

            understand this court may have:incorrectly dismissed the- action for ?,_pet_iod of years;

            however; Whether the_ court was wrong in dismissing_ the actiOn [in the 2014 Conditional

            Ordet of DiSmisSal], it Still issued a b!ncUng court_ order'' with which Nationstar should

            have complied {id. ati[ 15). Pastor Grub attests th.at "I understand tl1atPlaintiffmay have

            caused service of prdc·ess. upon the Defendant Corporation by setvice upo"n the Secretary

            Of State[,]" but"[ o)n the date of service, July 2.5, 2019, the Defendaht corporation was no

            longer op.eratii1g at is60 Ea.stem_ Parkway Uh] Brooklyn ..." and "I never had any clue·

            that:a mottgage <;ompanfwould attempt tq sue.n1y c.om_pai;i.y l_lfter the case was ·dismis~ed"

            (id: at 11, 21, 23, and 30).

                                                              6

                                                            6 of 10
[* 6]
                                                                                                      INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

            Nationstar 1S Opposition
                    Nationsfar, in opposition, submits. an attorney a:ffirma_tion argu,lng tha\ 236.4A

             Propertie~ '"Wa:5'properly serve.cl with the. Supplemental Suriullqns and A.rnehcled. G"omplaint

             for this action 'via the NYS Secretary of Sta(fi's offlc-e anµ it doe4 not allege frnproper

             service of process or lack of persona!JurisdiCtion . , .1' (NYSCEF Doc Nb. 93 ·at 'ii 3

             [emphasis added). Nationstar'·s. counsel notes·that Pastor Grub:

                           '·'appears to adtnit that sucl). servic,e occurred, but .claims that.
                           the mailing· address that the Secretary of State's offic,e has-0.n
                           file for Defendant (186.0 Eastern ParlcWay;. Brooklyn, New
                           York) "\Y3S ,allegedly' rto longer Defend'ant's inailirrg· a:ddress
                           when -service -occucre·ct On Juiy 25., 2019, tho)J.gh as OJ
                           November 8', 2022~ such remained Defendant 's mailing
                           ·address with the ·-Secretary of State·•s uffice ,per the' "Entity
                           Jt,:formatfon exhibited to_ [)~fondant's. Order to.: Sh,ow Cause
                            ... Pursuantto CPLR 320 and General Construction Law§ 25-
                            a, Defendant's time to answ'er expired 01,1 August 26, 20_19, ~nd
                            it undisputedly defilulted ih pleading" (i,i at 1[1[ 13-14).

             Counsel ·explains that after the Covi<l-19 pandeni:ic·mo,r~tbrlumS wete li,fteci,- Nationstar·

             ,promptly moved for an order of reference in April 2021, which was granted on default (id:

             .at iii 14.:.16). NaUonsta~· p_re,ceeded to move for an •.order confrrming the referee'-s report

             n:nd ajudgmeh.l c;,f forcclOstµ·e and sale, WhiclJ was_. gr.ant_ed wi~hout opposition ·on June _15,

             2023 (id. at 1[1[ 20 and 21 ). N ationstar' s courts el affirms.that 23 64A Properties was, in each

             instance, properly served: at the address it had on file with the New York Secretary Of State

             (id. at 1[1[ 16, \8 and i9). Counsel affirms that "[t]he fureclosure sale.was immediately

             scheduled to be held on October 26, 2023cat 2:30pm, and the notice ofsale was mailedto

             Defendant through the NYS Secretary of State's office" (id. at 1[ '.)2).
                                                             7

                                                          7 of 10
[* 7]
                                                                                                        INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

                                                         Discu ssion

                                                                                              .5015 (a) (1) must
                    A party seekin g to vacate a default innpp earing pursu antto CPLR
                                                                                           !ious· defense-to
             demonstrate a-reasonable excuse ·_fo;r the.default mltl a p"Otentiaffy roerito
                                                                           AD3d 560,                 562 [2017]
             the actio.n" (92-l8 149" Street Realty Co,p. v Sto!zberg, 152
                                                                                          inati.Qn WJthin
             [internal ·quotations omi_tted]). '"Whether an excuse is reasonable-ha determ
                                                                                       AD'.,d           81_3, .8J4
             the:sound .discretion of the Supreme Court" (;Crevecoeur v Mattam,._ 172'

              [2019], ~uotin g Walker v Mohammed, 90 AD3d 1034, 1034 [201 I]).
                                                                                                     favori ng the
                     Simila rly, pursua nt to CPLR 3012{ d), "[i]n light of the public policy
                                                                                                 iff to. aycept .an
              resciJutiQn at.cases on _their rri~rits, the Supterrte ·Gourt. may compel a plaint
                                                                                           straies. that (here was
              untimely answe r (see CPLR 2004, 3012 [d]) where the record demon
                                                                                                   110 Willfulness
              only a short-delay in appearing or-artswering the Complaint, th~t there was
                                                                                                 lff, ~d that a.
              -on the part of .the defendant., that ther:e_ would b_e rto prejudice to the plai~t

              potentia1ly m~ritorio.us defei;l(3e existsi' (Yongjle xu·v JJW Enterprises;
                                                                                          Inc.,. 149 AD3d

              1146, 1147 [20171).
                                                                                                  iated denial of
                     The Secon d Depar tment has repeatedly held that the "unsu bstant
                                                                                        e.did         not aihount.
              recyipt of the summons n_nd_ complaint served through ~e.Secretaty qfStat
                                                                                                     K 5 j Realty1
              to a reasonable exc_us·e f9r the. defendane·s default" (see Jing Shan:.Chen v R.&
                                                                                                     Full Gospel
              Inc., 148 AD3d 689, 691 [20.17]; Town House Sta, LLC v New Fellowship
                                                                                              unsub stantia te~
              Baptist Church,-htc., 29 AD3d 293, 894 [2.006.J. [holdi ng !h.at ''appe llant's
                                                                                              for its- defaulti       1

              denial ·ofre_ceJp(o.f service of process did -not amount toµ reasonable,ex_cuse

                                                                8

                                                           8 of 10
[* 8]
                                                                                                      INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                      RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

             and ''is· insufficient-to rebut. the presumption of pro1J"er·.service created by an affidavit of

             service"])'.

                     lrriportantly, the Second Department has repeaiedly held that "[i]f the' appellant

             failed ta actt,13.liy-recelve a ~opy oTtlie sum~ons and oompiairttffoq1-the Secretary of State

             due to a-change of address;- [as fa the case here] it was due tn its own- fault-as it fai1ed to

             ke_ep the Secretary of'State advised [otJ its current.addr,-ess for the fmw-ardir;ig o.f.process' 1

             (SUesman v Jo-Sta Realty Corp., 99 AD3d 787, 788 [2012], quoting Tow,,,House St., LLC

             v New Fellowship Full Gospel Baptist Church, l>ii:., 29 AD3d at 894; see Castle v Avant/,

             Ltd, 86 AD3d 53 I, 531 [201 I] [holding that "defendant's failure to,keepa current address

             .on file with the Secretary of State d_iP not constitute a .reasonable excuse for·its failure, to

             a,t=ipe:ar qr answer the cottipla'int'']).

                     Here, 23,64A Properties failed (o proyide a reasonable excuse for its, appearance

             default; eSpccia11y since Pastor Grub adinitted that 2364A Ptoperties failed to keep a

             current address on file-with the New York Secretary of State. befendant.2.364APr□perties'

             c9nclusory denial of receiving a copy of the supJ)lement_al -$Ummon,$ and amended

             con;iplaint froril the S-ecreta1yofSt?te is insufficie11t to ovet~om,e the presumption ofproper

             service established by Natio"rlstcif'S affid~vits o(service in the record, as a ITi'att€lf Uf law.

             Nationstar's affii:fav.it- of service proves that Nationstar setved .2364-A Properties by

             QCHverj~g.tv,,19 copies·of thc.,amended pleadings-to tb:eNew YorkBecrefary'of State on July

             25, 2019 (seeNYSCEF Doc Nos. 79 and 84).

                                                            9

                                                          9 of 10
[* 9]
                                                                                                      INDEX NO. 4843/2010
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 100                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

                     Notably, while 2364A Properde s moved by drder t.o show t•use oµ October 24,

             2023,,. to sl~y the Oc:tobe_r 26, 2023 forcci_osm:e sale:; defense counsel is affirmation reflects

             that it was executed nearly one.year-earli<?r on Novemb er 08_, 2022, as is the·Depa ftinent

             uf State Division. of Col]J_O'tations Eriticy Infotmat ioh ~heel submrrted by 23.64.A Propertie s

             as ExhibitB .in suppoct ofits ''emergen cy" OSC (see NYSCEF Pot Nos. 60 ;it 17 an.d 63).

             This'.begs the-question ofWhen and how defendant 2364A Properties aCtuaHY leartied,about

             this forecldsµre action .and ·why it waited ne;:.irly .o_ne -year- before.- .moving to-·vacate Hs

             default(S) on the eve of the foreqlQsurG ;:i._uctiOn 1 and mqre than four years .after fts-

             app.earance. -default -in- 201-9·.   Since defendinit 23_64A Propertie,5- fai_led .to provi_de.· a

             -reasonably ~x~use for "its appearan·ce defauJi and" delay in moving to vacate· it, ih_e_ cdurt

            Il:ee:d not Qetennin e Whether defendan t 23.64A Pmpe1ties. demonstr ated a potentially

            meritorio us defense(Nationstar Morig., LLC v Farrell, 172 AD3d 1077, 1078 [20191).

            Accordlng.ly,_·it is,hereby

                    ORDERED that the branches of 2364A Propertie s' in.Qtidn (in mot seq, eight)

            seeking to vacate its appeamn ce default, pursuant to 317, 5015 (a) (l) and/or 5015 (a) (4),

            and for leave to file a late answer to the amended compJai nt,pursua nt to CPLR 3012 (d),

            are.-deni ed;·tlrnrc maining ~ratic,:;hes of2364A .Propciti es' mo.tion are denied as moot

                   Thi•.s constitute s the decision and ordet df-t;he coUtt.

                                                                 ENTE R,

                                                                 J. s.
                                                            rn . HON. LAWRENCE KNIPt:L
                                                                 ADMINISTRATIVE J.UDGE

                                                           10 of 10
[* 10]