Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
U.S. Bank N.A.. v Solorin w

U.S. Bank N.A.. v Solorin w

Ratings:
(0)
|Views: 739|Likes:
Published by DinSFLA

More info:

Published by: DinSFLA on Nov 11, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

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

11/12/2011

pdf

text

original

 
[*1]
U.S. Bank N.A.. v Solorin
2011 NY Slip Op 21391Decided on November 10, 2011Supreme Court, Queens CountyFlug, J.Published byNew York State Law Reporting Bureaupursuant to Judiciary Law §431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the printedOfficial Reports.
Decided on November 10, 2011
Supreme Court, Queens CountyU.S. Bank National Association, AS TRUSTEE FOR CSMC2007-4, 3476 Stateview Boulevard, Ft. Mill, SC 29715, Plaintiff,againstRamon M. Solorin, ET.AL., Defendant.
5769/10Attorney for Plaintiff:Steven J. Baum, PC900 Merchants Concourse, Ste. 116Westbury, New York 11590Attorney for Defendant:R. David Marquez, PC
.S. Bank N.A.. v Solorin (2011 NY Slip Op 21391)http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2011/2011_21391.htm1 of 311/10/2011 9:52 PM
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
 
50 Clinton Street, Ste. 98Hempstead, New York 11550Phyllis Orlikoff Flug, J.The following papers numbered 1 to 4 read on this motionNotice of Motion1 - 2Affirmation in Opposition3[*2]Reply Affirmation4Defendant, Ramon Solorin, moves to dismiss plaintiff's Complaint as asserted against him.This is an action to foreclose a mortgage on the real property located at 23-11 99th Street,in the County of Queens, City and State of New York.CPLR 3215[c] provide that "[i]f the plaintiff fails to take proceedings for the entry of  judgment within one year after the default, the court shall not enter judgment but shall dismissthe complaint as abandoned . . . unless sufficient cause is shown why the complaint should notbe dismissed."Plaintiff served the Summons and Complaint on defendant Solorin by substitute service onMarch 11, 2010. Defendant Solorin filed an answer on May 19, 2010. On May 27, 2010,plaintiff rejected defendant's answer as untimely, stating that defendant's time to answer hadexpired on April 25, 2010.Although defendant has been in default since April 25, 2010, plaintiff has not yet movedfor entry of a default judgment against him. While plaintiff moved on August 3, 2010, for anorder appointing a receiver, plaintiff's notice of motion did not contain any request for a default judgment (
See Arriaga v. Michael Laub Co.
, 233 AD2d 244, 245 [1st Dept. 1996]). In anyevent, plaintiff voluntarily withdrew that motion on November 18, 2010.Plaintiff contends that it has demonstrated sufficient cause as to why the complaint should
.S. Bank N.A.. v Solorin (2011 NY Slip Op 21391)http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2011/2011_21391.htm2 of 311/10/2011 9:52 PM
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com

You're Reading a Free Preview

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