| One W. Bank, FSB v DiPilato |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 00507 [124 AD3d 735] |
| January 21, 2015 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| One West Bank, FSB, Respondent, v GeorgeDiPilato, Appellant, et al., Defendant. |
William J. Robb, Hawthorne, N.Y., for appellant.
Frenkel, Lambert, Weiss, Weisman & Gordon, LLP, Bay Shore, N.Y. (Joseph F.Battista and Larry Powell of counsel), for respondent.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant George DiPilato appeals, aslimited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, PutnamCounty (Nicolai, J.), dated December 10, 2013, which, inter alia, granted that branch ofthe plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar asasserted against him.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law byproducing the mortgage, the unpaid note, and evidence of default (see Peak Fin. Partners, Inc. vBrook, 119 AD3d 539 [2014]; Kondaur Capital Corp. v McCary, 115 AD3d 649, 650[2014]; Deutsche Bank Natl.Trust Co. v Whalen, 107 AD3d 931, 932 [2013]). In opposition, the appellantfailed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly grantedthat branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the complaintinsofar as asserted against the appellant (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d320 [1986]).
The appellant's remaining contentions are either without merit or improperly raisedfor the first time on appeal. Mastro, J.P., Roman, Sgroi and Barros, JJ., concur.