From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Green Point Savings Bank v. Spivey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 3, 1998
253 A.D.2d 410 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

August 3, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff bank made a prima facie showing that it was entitled to a judgment of foreclosure as a matter of law by offering proof that the mortgagor executed the loan documents and defaulted on the payments ( see, Fairfield Affiliates v. Rosenbaum, 232 A.D.2d 522; ICC Bridgeport Ltd. Partnership v. Primrose Dev. Corp., 221 A.D.2d 417). The burden then shifted to the mortgagor to demonstrate, by admissible evidence, that there were genuine issues of material fact which required a trial ( see, Union State Bank v. Blankfort, 222 A.D.2d 430, 431). The mortgagor's conclusory allegations that the plaintiff bank failed to provide a payment coupon book and other information about the mortgage were insufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment ( see, European Am. Bank v. Abramoff 201 A.D.2d 611). Inasmuch as the mortgagor failed to sustain her burden, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and directed foreclosure and sale.

Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Sullivan and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Green Point Savings Bank v. Spivey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 3, 1998
253 A.D.2d 410 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Green Point Savings Bank v. Spivey

Case Details

Full title:GREEN POINT SAVINGS BANK, Respondent, v. THELMA SPIVEY, Also Known as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 3, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 410 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
676 N.Y.S.2d 228

Citing Cases

NIC Holding Corp. v. Eisenegger

ORDERED that counsel for plaintiff shall promptly serve a copy of this Order upon all parties via First Class…

Wieck v. Halpern

The defendant moved to vacate the default arguing, inter alia, that he was not served with the motion papers…