Legal Opinion
Indymac Bank, F.S.B. v. Kamen
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 15, 2009PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In support of its motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff made a prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In opposition, the appellant failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]).
Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the notice of default sent to him by the respondent duly afforded him an opportunity to cure his default, as required by the terms of the subject mortgage. Furthermore, the notice of default otherwise substantially complied with the terms of the mortgage (see First Trust Natl. Assn. v Meisels,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Alvarez v. Prospect HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Cavalry Portfolio Servs., LLC v. ReismanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Remington Investment, Inc. v. SeidenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Moet v. McCarthyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
3Cited by5 opinions
- Pennymac Holdings, LLC v. TomanelliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Hudson City Savings Bank v. FriedmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- AXIOM Bank v. DutanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Wachovia Bank, National Ass'n v. CarcanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Wachovia Bank, National Ass'n v. CarcanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013