From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United Corp. v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 9, 2007
45 A.D.3d 1419 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. CA 07-01468.

November 9, 2007.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Thomas G. Leone, A.J.), entered June 29, 2007 in a foreclosure action. The order, inter alia, denied the motion of defendants Dennis E. Rogers and Roxanne C. Rogers seeking, inter alia, to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale entered upon their default.

KARPINSKI, STAPLETON, GALBATO TEHAN, P.C., AUBURN (DAVID G. TEHAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Present: Hurlbutt, J.P., Centra, Lunn, Fahey and Pine, JJ.


It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Dennis E. Rogers and Roxanne C. Rogers (defendants) appeal from an order denying their motion seeking, inter alia, to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale entered upon their default. Plaintiff commenced this foreclosure action alleging that defendants failed to comply with the conditions of the mortgage issued by plaintiff to defendants, and defendants failed to answer the complaint. We reject defendants' contention that Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction over this action based on an erroneous description of the property in the mortgage and related foreclosure documents and thus that the default judgment granted by the court is void. Contrary to defendants' contention, the erroneous description of the property did not deprive the court of jurisdiction over this action inasmuch as the "pleadings and other papers were sufficiently particular to give notice of the property subject to foreclosure" ( American Mtge. Bank v Matovitz, 208 AD2d 788, 788). Contrary to defendants' further contention, the court properly applied the "doctrine of equitable mortgages" in enforcing the terms of the mortgage despite the erroneous description of the mortgaged property ( Sprague v Cochran, 144 NY 104, 113; see Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v Five Star Mgt., 258 AD2d 15, 21-22).


Summaries of

United Corp. v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 9, 2007
45 A.D.3d 1419 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

United Corp. v. Rogers

Case Details

Full title:UNITED COMPANIES LENDING CORPORATION, Respondent, v. DENNIS E. ROGERS et…

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

Date published: Nov 9, 2007

Citations

45 A.D.3d 1419 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 8690
845 N.Y.S.2d 884

Citing Cases

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Wine

Here, the complaint contains the street address and a metes and bounds description of the property, together…

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Deering

Finally, defendants did not raise a triable issue of fact whether plaintiff acted fraudulently. Indeed, we…