In a May 23, 2011 decision by Justice Hinds-Radix the court denied an attempt by tenants of a property to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale of a property. The tenants, a church and its reverend, argued that the judgment and sale should be vacated based on excusable default and lack of knowledge of the action. The tenants also brought their motion based on the bank’s failure to properly serve them under Real Property Action and Proceeding Law § 1303.
The court denied the tenants’ motion because they failed to demonstrate a meritorious defense to the action – they did not demonstrate the underlying mortgage was invalid, that there was no default in payment under the mortgage or that the mortgagee had any other cognizable defenses to the forelclosure. The court further found that Real Property Action and Proceeding Law § 1303, as it existed when the action was commenced, did not require additional notice to a tenant (and that a subsequent modification, though passed into law, did not take effect until approximately two months after the foreclosure action was commenced).
Flushing Savings Bank v. 509 Rogers LLC, Sup Ct, Kings County, May 23, 2011, Hinds-Radix, J, Index No. 29529/09.