Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
WELLS FARGO v EISLER

WELLS FARGO v EISLER

Ratings: (0)|Views: 149 |Likes:
Published by anna338
DECISION
DECISION

More info:

Published by: anna338 on Jun 26, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/14/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Supreme Court of the State of New YorkAppellate Division: Second Judicial Department
D42046Q/htr AD3d Argued - March 24, 2014RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.THOMAS A. DICKERSONJOHN M. LEVENTHALSHERI S. ROMAN, JJ.2013-05498 DECISION & ORDEWells Fargo Bank, N.A., etc., appellant, v GeorgeEisler, et al., respondents, et al., defendants.(Index No. 132152/09)HoganLovellsUSLLP,NewYork,N.Y.(LeahRabinowitz,DavidDunn,andChavaBrandriss of counsel), for appellant.Law Offices of Robert E. Brown, P.C., New York, N.Y., for respondents.In an action,interalia,toforecloseamortgage,theplaintiffappeals from an orderof the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Aliotta, J.), dated December 20, 2012, which denied itsmotion, inter alia, for summary judgment on the complaint and granted that branch of the crossmotionofthedefendantsGeorgeEislerandDorisEislerwhichwastodismissthecomplaintinsofaas asserted against them for failure to comply with a condition precedent.ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.Theplaintiffcommencedthisaction,interalia,toforecloseamortgage. Inansweringthe complaint, the defendants George Eisler and Doris Eisler (hereinafter together the Eisler defendants) set forth several affirmative defenses, including that, as a condition precedent to thecommencement of the action, the mortgage documents required the plaintiff to provide a notice of default, and theplaintiffhad not doneso. The plaintiffmoved, interalia, forsummaryjudgment onthe complaint. The Eisler defendants cross-moved, among other things, to dismiss the complaintinsofar as asserted against them on the ground that the plaintiff failed to comply with the condition precedent of the mortgage agreement requiring the plaintiff to send a notice of default prior to thecommencement of the action. The Supreme Court denied the plaintiff’s motion and granted thesubject branch of the Eisler defendants’ cross motion. The plaintiff appeals.June 25, 2014 Page 1.WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v EISLER 

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->