| Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Abdan |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 06775 [131 AD3d 1001] |
| September 16, 2015 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Trustee forCarrington Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2005-NC3 Asset Backed Pass-ThroughCertificates, Respondent, v Rachel Abdan, Appellant, et al.,Defendants. |
Menashe & Associates, LLP, Montebello, N.Y. (Chezki Menashe of counsel),for appellant.
Knuckles, Komosinski & Elliott, LLP, Elmsford, N.Y. (Michel Lee of counsel),for respondent.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Rachel Abdan appeals from ajudgment of foreclosure and sale of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Kelly, J.),dated September 4, 2013, which, upon an order of the same court dated November 5,2012, granting that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment onthe complaint insofar as asserted against her, among other things, directed the sale of thesubject premises.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
"Generally, in moving for summary judgment in an action to foreclose a mortgage, aplaintiff establishes its prima facie case through the production of the mortgage, theunpaid note, and evidence of default. When, however, the defendant has placed standingin issue, the plaintiff must establish proper standing as part of its prima facie case" (Plaza Equities, LLC vLamberti, 118 AD3d 688, 689 [2014] [citations omitted]).
Here, in support of that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment onthe complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Rachel Abdan, the plaintiffproduced the mortgage, the unpaid note, and evidence of default. The plaintiff alsoestablished that it had standing to commence this action by submitting the affidavit of avice-president of the plaintiff's loan servicer, which established that the plaintiff hadphysical possession of the note prior to the commencement of this action (see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC vTaylor, 25 NY3d 355 [2015]; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Arias, 121 AD3d 973, 974[2014]; Kondaur Capital Corp.v McCary, 115 AD3d 649, 650 [2014]). In opposition, Abdan failed to raise atriable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of theplaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as assertedagainst Abdan. Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Cohen and Barros, JJ., concur.