From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sarasota v. Homestead Acres at Greenport

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 6, 1998
249 A.D.2d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

April 6, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for leave to enter a deficiency judgment against the defendants Homestead Acres at Greenport, Inc., and Schabse Gordon is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for a hearing on the issue of the fair and reasonable market value of the mortgaged premises as of the date of the foreclosure sale, and the entry of an appropriate deficiency judgment.

We agree with the appellant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in denying that branch of the appellant's motion which was for leave to enter a deficiency judgment because the motion papers were served upon the receptionist who worked in the building where the respondents' attorney's office was located. Since it is undisputed that the respondents' attorney received actual, timely notice of the motion, service of the papers upon the receptionist was sufficient to satisfy the requirement set forth in RPAPL 1371 (2) that notice of a motion to recover a deficiency be "personally served" upon the mortgagee's attorney (see, Columbus Realty Inv. Corp. v. Weng-Heng Tsaing, 226 A.D.2d 259; Roosevelt Sav. Bank v. Tsotsos, 215 A.D.2d 547). "Where actual notice has been timely received, substantial compliance with [RPAPL 1371 (2)] is all that is required" (Heritage Sav. Bank v. Grabowski, 70 A.D.2d 989, 990, citing Catholic Women's Benevolent Legion v. Burke, 253 App. Div. 261, 264).

However, since the evidence submitted by the appellant regarding the value of the mortgaged premises at the time of sale is not determinative of the issue, a hearing should be conducted to determine the amount of the deficiency due (see, Columbus Realty Inv. Corp. v. Gray, 240 A.D.2d 529; Ogdensburg Sav. Loan Assn. v. Moore, 100 A.D.2d 679).

O'Brien, J.P., Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sarasota v. Homestead Acres at Greenport

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 6, 1998
249 A.D.2d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Sarasota v. Homestead Acres at Greenport

Case Details

Full title:SARASOTA, INC., Doing Business as CREDIT CONTROL MANAGEMENT, Appellant, v…

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

Date published: Apr 6, 1998

Citations

249 A.D.2d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
670 N.Y.S.2d 878

Citing Cases

Bank of Am. v. Rolf

"The defendant can overcome the presumption raised by the process server's affidavit of service with a sworn…

Rhineback, Bank v. WA 319 Main LLC

It is well settled that the personal service requirement of RPAPL§ 1371 (2), is substantially complied with…