| Retained Realty, Inc. v Syed |
| 2016 NY Slip Op 02068 [137 AD3d 1099] |
| March 23, 2016 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| Retained Realty, Inc., Respondent, v Yawar H.Syed, Also Known as Syed Yawar Hussain, Appellant, et al.,Defendants. |
Daniel Kogan, Ozone Park, NY (Joseph F. Kasper of counsel), for appellant.
Stagg, Terenzi, Confusione & Wabnik, LLP, Garden City, NY (Ronald P.Labeck of counsel), for respondent.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Yawar H. Syed appeals from somuch of a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dear,J.), dated July 1, 2013, as, upon an order of the same court dated October 15, 2012,granting the plaintiff's motion, inter alia, for summary judgment on the complaint,directed the sale of the subject premises.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion, inter alia, for summaryjudgment on the complaint. The plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement tojudgment as a matter of law by submitting the mortgage, the unpaid note, and theaffidavit of its vice president attesting to the appellant's default (see Emigrant Mtge. Co., Inc. vBeckerman, 105 AD3d 895, 895 [2013]; Argent Mtge. Co., LLC v Mentesana, 79 AD3d 1079[2010]; U.S. Bank Natl. Assn.TR U/S 6/01/98 [Home Equity Loan Trust 1998-2] v Alvarez, 49 AD3d 711[2008]). In opposition, the appellant failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to a bona fidedefense to the action (see Emigrant Mtge. Co., Inc. v Beckerman, 105 AD3d at895; Baron Assoc., LLC vGarcia Group Enters., Inc., 96 AD3d 793 [2012]; cf. U.S. Bank Natl. Assn.TR U/S 6/01/98 [Home Equity Loan Trust 1998-2] v Alvarez, 49 AD3d at 711).Specifically, the appellant failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the subjectloan was the product of predatory lending. Moreover, the appellant failed to raise atriable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff failed to negotiate in good faith to reach amutually agreeable resolution, including a loan modification, if possible, as required byCPLR 3408 (f) (cf. OnewestBank, FSB v Colace, 130 AD3d 994 [2015]).
The appellant's contention that the plaintiff failed to establish that it had standing topursue foreclosure is improperly raised for the first time on appeal, and therefore is notproperly before this Court (seePerla v Daytree Custom Bldrs., Inc., 119 AD3d 758, 760 [2014]; NYU Hosp. for Joint Diseases vCountry Wide Ins. Co., 84 AD3d 1043, 1044 [2011]). Mastro, J.P., Hall, Millerand LaSalle, JJ., concur.