Opinion
9878 Index 850291/17
09-24-2019
Friedman Vartolo LLP, New York (Zachary Gold of counsel), for appellant. Rozario & Associates, P.C., New York (Rovin R. Rozario of counsel), for respondent.
Friedman Vartolo LLP, New York (Zachary Gold of counsel), for appellant.
Rozario & Associates, P.C., New York (Rovin R. Rozario of counsel), for respondent.
Sweeny, J.P., Richter, Kapnick, Kern, Singh, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith N. McMahon, J.), entered December 14, 2018, which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on its foreclosure complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted.
Plaintiff established its standing to foreclose on the mortgage by attaching to the complaint a copy of the mortgage, a copy of the note, on which is it undisputed that defendant defaulted, and a copy of the mortgage assignment (see Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Knowles, 151 A.D.3d 596, 57 N.Y.S.3d 473 [1st Dept. 2017] ). Contrary to defendant Moran's contention, plaintiff was not required to submit proof that the note, as well as the mortgage, was assigned ( id. at 596–597, 57 N.Y.S.3d 473 ).
Plaintiff established its compliance with RPAPL 1304 by submitting copies of the required default and 90–day foreclosure notices with an affidavit by the loan servicer's foreclosure specialist stating, based upon her review of the loan servicer's records, that the notices were mailed to defendant in accordance with the provisions of the statute (see Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Al Rasheed, 169 A.D.3d 532, 92 N.Y.S.3d 637 [1st Dept. 2019] ; Bank of Am., N.A. v. Brannon, 156 A.D.3d 1, 8, 63 N.Y.S.3d 352 [1st Dept. 2017] ).
In opposition, defendant failed to raise an issue of fact.