Legal Opinion
EMC Mortgage Corp. v. Suarez
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 11, 2008PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*593Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the instant mortgage foreclosure action is not time-barred (see CPLR 213 [4]). While another entity purported to accelerate the appellants’ mortgage debt in a prior action commenced on April 8, 1997, the note was never assigned to that entity and it therefore never had authority to accelerate the debt or to sue to foreclose. Accordingly, the purported acceleration was a nullity and the six-year statute of limitations, which ordinarily would commence running on the date of acceleration (see Clayton Natl. v Guldi, 307 AD2d 982 [2003]; Lavin v Elmakiss,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Edenwald Contracting Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- EMC Mortgage Corp. v. PatellaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Loiacono v. GoldbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Lavin v. ElmakissAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Clayton National, Inc. v. GuldiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
3Cited by26 opinions
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. BurkeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. WeisblumAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. CohenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- 21st Mortgage Corp. v. AdamesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Mejias v. Wells Fargo N.A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.