From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Citibank v. Pierre

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 13, 1995
213 A.D.2d 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

March 13, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCarty, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff established its entitlement to summary judgment in this action to foreclose on the appellants' mortgage by offering proof of the mortgage and a default in payment (see, Dime Sav. Bank v. Rand, 204 A.D.2d 261; European Am. Bank v. Strab Constr. Corp., 196 A.D.2d 479). It was incumbent upon the appellants to establish, by proof in admissible form, the existence of a triable issue of fact (see, Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320; Mlcoch v. Smith, 173 A.D.2d 443). They failed to do so. Therefore, summary judgment was properly granted.

The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, J.P., Pizzuto, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Citibank v. Pierre

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 13, 1995
213 A.D.2d 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Citibank v. Pierre

Case Details

Full title:CITIBANK, N.A., Respondent, v. MOLIERE PIERRE et al., Appellants, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 13, 1995

Citations

213 A.D.2d 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
624 N.Y.S.2d 38

Citing Cases

State of New York Mortgage Agency v. Lavin

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1) to vacate an order…

Polanco v. City of New York

The plaintiff made out a prima facie case for summary judgment. The defendants' submissions failed to create…