Legal Opinion
Shufelt v. Bulfamante
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 28, 2012PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*937The plaintiff established, prima facie, that the defendant Maria Bulfamante (hereinafter Maria) was in default under the subject mortgage note by demonstrating the existence of the note, the execution thereof by Maria, and Maria’s failure to make timely repayments thereunder. In opposition to the plaintiffs showing, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Moreover, the existence of a dispute as to the exact amount owed by Maria to the plaintiff does not preclude the award of summary judgment to the plaintiff on the issue of foreclosure (see Long Is. Sav. Bank of Centereach,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Paine v. . UptonNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Belknap v. . SealeyNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Long Island Savings Bank of Centereach, F.S.B. v. DenkensohnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Mills v. . KampfeNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Shay v. MitchellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Emigrant Bank v. CohenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- Mishal v. Fiduciary Holdings, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Excel Capital Group Corp. v. 225 Ross St. Realty, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018
- Mishal v. Fiduciary Holdings, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- THE EKELMANN GROUP, LLC v. STUART, W. DEANAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013