Preview
FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF ONEIDA BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Index No. Date Filed: Plaintiff, SUMMONS -against- Plaintiff designates THE UNKNOWN HEIRS AND DISTRIBUTEES OF THE Oneida as the County ESTATE OF LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE place of trialbased on HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES, IF LIVING, AND IF the location of the THEY BE DEAD, ANY AND ALL PERSONS WHO MAY mortgaged premises in CLAIM AS DEVISEES, DISTRIBUTES, AND this action. SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO SAID DEFENDANT, ALL OF WHOM AND WHOSE PLACES OF RESIDENCE ARE UNKNOWN TO PLAINTIFF, AND CANNOT AFTER DILIGENT INQUIRY BE ASCERTAINED, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION AND FINANCE, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INTERNAL DOE" DOE" REVENUE SERVICE, "JOHN AND/OR "JANE # 1-10 INCLUSIVE, THE LAST TEN NAMES BEING FICTITIOUS AND UNKNOWN TO PLAINTIFF, THE PERSONS OR PARTIES INTENDED BEING THE TENANTS, OCCUPANTS, PERSONS, CORPORATIONS OR HEIRS AT LAW, IF ANY, HAVING OR CLAIMING AN INTEREST IN OR LIEN UPON THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN THE COMPLAINT, Defendants. We are attempting to collect a debt, and any information ebtsiñêd will be used for that purpose. To the above-named defendants: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the plaintiffs attorneys within twenty (20) days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within thirty (30) days after the service is complete if this - 1 - Filed In Oneida Clerks Office 8/27/2018 1 of 78 10:47:25 AM Index # EFCA2018-002477 County FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York) or within (60) days after service of this summons if it isthe United States of America; and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. NOTICE Y_OU ARE IN DANGER OF LOSING YOUR HOME If you do not respond to this summons and complaint by serving a copy of the answer on the for the mortgage c=ai- who filed this foreclosure against you attorney -=y pracceding and filing the answer with the court, a default judgnnñt may be entered and you can lose your home. Speak to an attorney or go to the court where your case is pcñdiñg for further information on how to answer the summons and protect your property. Sending a payment to your mortgage company will not stop this foreclosure action. YOU MUST RESPOND BY SERVING A COPY OF THE ANSWER ON THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF (MORTGAGE COMPANY) AND FILING THE ANSWER WITH THE COURT. NOTICE OF NATURE OF ACTION AND RELIEF SOUGHT This is an action to foreclose a mortgage lien on the premises described herein. The object of the above captioned action is to foreclose a Mortgage to secure $33,600.00 and interest, recorded in the Office of the County Clerk of Oneida County on December 15, 2004 in Instrument No. 2004-028822, which mortgage was assigned to BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. by assignment of mortgage dated May 24, 2017, which was recorded in the Office of the County Clerk of Oneida County on May 31, 2017 in Instrument 2017-007794, covering premises known - 2 - 2 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 as 88 3RD STREET, CAMDEN, COUNTY OF ONEIDA, STATE OF NEW YORK 13316 (SECTION 128.013, BLOCK 2 AND LOT 65). The relief sought in the within action is a finaljudgment directing the sale of the premises described above. Dated: Rosl Hpights, New York , 2018 DAVID A. GAL & SOCIATES LLP By: Day d A. àÌt110, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff 99 Powerhouse Road - First Floor Roslyn Heights, NY 11577 (516) 583-5330 583-5333 - fax (516) TO: THE UNKNOWN HEIRS AND DISTRIBUTEES OF THE ESTATE OF LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES 88 3RD STREET CAMDEN, NEW YORK 13316 NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION AND FINANCE W.A. HARRIMAN CAMPUS ALBANY, NY 12227 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 10 METROTECH CENTER 625 FULTON STREET BROOKLYN, NY 11201 - 3 - 3 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF ONEIDA BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Index No. Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT -against- MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE THE UNKNOWN HEIRS AND DISTRIBUTEES OF THE ESTATE OF LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES, IF LIVING, AND IF THEY BE DEAD, ANY AND ALL PERSONS WHO MAY CLAIM AS DEVISEES, DISTRIBUTES, AND SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO SAID DEFENDANT, ALL OF WHOM AND WHOSE PLACES OF RESIDENCE ARE UNKNOWN TO PLAINTIFF, AND CANNOT AFTER DILIGENT INQUIRY BE ASCERTAINED, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION AND FINANCE, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INTERNAL DOE" REVENUE SERVICE, "JOHN AND/OR "JANE DOE" # 1-10 INCLUSIVE, THE LAST TEN NAMES BEING FICTITIOUS AND UNKNOWN TO PLAINTIFF, THE PERSONS OR PARTIES INTENDED BEING THE TENANTS, OCCUPANTS, PERSONS, CORPORATIONS OR HEIRS AT LAW, IF ANY, HAVING OR CLAIMING AN INTEREST IN OR LIEN UPON THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN THE COMPLAINT, Defendants. Plaintiff BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., (hereinafter referred to as "BANA"), by its attorneys, David A. Gallo & Associates LLP, complains and alleges, upon information and belief, as follows: 1. This is an action to foreclose a mortgage lien on the premises described herein. 2. The plaintiff is the mortgagee and the holder of the subject note and mortgage and if not the owner, has been delegated the authority to institute a mortgage foreclosure action by the owner and holder of the subject note and mortgage. See attached note incorporated herein. - 1 - 4 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 Foreclosing party or creditor ("Noteholder"), directly or through an agent, has possession of the promissory note. The promissory note is either made payable to the Foreclosing Party or has been duly indorsed. 3. Where applicable, the plaintiff has complied with all of the provisions of the Law 595-a and rules and regulations promulgated Law 6-1 or 6- Banking § thereunder, Banking § m as applicable to the subject loan, and RPAPL § 1304, as amended. 4. The plaintiff, assignee or mortgage loan servicer, has timely complied with the provisions of RPAPL § 1306. 5. A ninety (90) day pre-foreclosure notice ("90 Day Notice") was sent to ESTATE OF LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES on May 4, 2018 to the address of the property, at 88 3RD STREET, CAMDEN, County of Oneida, State of New York 13316 and to the Borrower's lastknown address which is 88 3RD STREET, CAMDEN, NY 13316, by registered or certified and firstclass mail. The certified mailing bore United States Postal Service Tracking Number 9314 7100 1170 0957 0670 46. 6. The title of the 90 Day Notice was typed in at least fourteen (14) point font. The text following the title of the 90 Day Notice was typed in at least fourteen (14) point font. 7. Plaintiff is,and at alltimes relevant herein was, a corporation authorized to conduct business in the State of New York, with itsprincipal place of business c/o BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., located at 101 N TRYON STREET, CHARLOTTE, NC 28255. 8. The premises, which are the subject of this action, are situated at 88 3RD STREET, CAMDEN, COUNTY OF ONEIDA, STATE OF NEW YORK 13316 (the "Premises"). 9. THE UNKNOWN HEIRS AND DISTRIBUTEES OF THE ESTATE OF LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES is named as Defendant - 2 - 5 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 because they are heirs and distributes of the ESTATE OF LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES. Upon information and belief, said defendant's last known residence is at the Premises. 10. Doe" Doe" 11. "John and/or "Jane # 1-10 inclusive, are fictitious and unknown to plaintiff. They are named as defendants to designate any and all tenants, occupants, persons, corporations or heirs at law, if any, having or claiming an interest in or lien upon the Premises. 12. The following are made party defendants herein solely because they may have or claim to have a lien affecting the Premises: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION AND FINANCE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE The above liens are subject and subordinate to the lien of the Plaintiffs mortgage. (See, copy of Mortgage/Judgment Schedules attached hereto and made part hereof.) 13. On or about December 3, 2004, decedent LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES, ("Decedent") executed and delivered to COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC. a Note (the "Note"), whereby the Decedent agreed to pay to COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC. or its transferees the sum of $33,600.00, plus increases in principal, ifany, with interest thereon, installments of principal and interest to be paid monthly, in substantially equal payments on the same date of each month until maturity, all as provided in the Note. 14. As collateral security for the payment of the Note, decedent LINDA F. HUGHES A/K/A LINDA FAYE HUGHES A/K/A LINDA HUGHES executed, acknowledged, and delivered to MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. AS NOMINEE FOR COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC. a mortgage dated December 3, 2004, in the - 3 - 6 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 principal amount of $33,600.00 (the "Mortgage"), which was recorded in the Office of the County Clerk of Oneida County on December 15, 2004 in Instrument No. 2004-028822, and the mortgage recording tax was duly paid, which mortgage was assigned to BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. by assignment of mortgage dated May 24, 2017, which was recorded in the Office of the County Clerk of Oneida County on May 31, 2017 in Instrument 2017-007794. 15. The Premises encumbered by said Mortgage, with all appurtenances thereto, is bounded and fully described in Schedule A annexed hereto and made part hereof. 16. The Note provides, inter alia, for the payment of late charges in case of default of any installment which has become due and remained unpaid in excess of 15 days and further provides, inter alia, for the payment of all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees in the event the Note is referred to an attorney for collection. 17. The Mortgage obligated the Decedent, inter alia, to pay, on a monthly basis, to plaintiff, at plaintiffs option, an amount equal to 1/12 of the annual taxes, assessments, ground rents, and hazard and mortgage insurance premiums to become due in connection with the Premises pursuant to the Mortgage. 18. The Mortgage provides, inter alia, for the payment of late charges in case of default of any installment which has become due and remained unpaid in excess of 15 days. 19. The Mortgage provides, inter alia, that in the event of a default in the payment of any principal or interest that might become due thereon, plaintiff may declare the entire indebtedness secured by the Mortgage immediately due and payable and commence an action to foreclose the Defendant's rights in the Premises and sell them pursuant to applicable law. 20. The Note and Mortgage obligated the Decedent, inter alia, to pay plaintiffs reasonable attorney's fees in the event of a default and in any action to foreclose the Mortgage. - 4 - 7 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 21. The Decedent and her estate defaulted under the terms of the Note and Mortgage by omitting and failing to make monthly payments of principal and interest due from April 1, 2018 through date. 22. As a result of the foregoing and in accordance with its rights under the Note and Mortgage, plaintiff has elected to exercise itsoption to demand immediate payment in full of the amounts outstanding under the Note and Mortgage and has notified the Decedent of itsdecision to demand immediate payment in full. 23. As a result of the Decedent's failure to pay the obligation under the Note and Mortgage, there is now due and owing to plaintiff on the principal of the Mortgage the sum of $5,860.12 together with accrued interest from March 1, 2018 at the present rate of 6.250% as stated in the Note and Mortgage, and such other payments as are set forth in the Note and Mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, plaintiff seeks the unpaid principal balance, interest arrears, escrows and such other payments as may be due under the note and mortgage as may be collected under applicable New York law. Plaintiff does not seek to sue or collect on any debt that may be barred under the statute of limitations. 24. In order to protect its security, plaintiff may be compelled during the pendency of this action to pay sums for premiums on insurance policies, real estate taxes, assessments, water charges and sewer rents which are or may become liens on the mortgaged premises, and other charges which may be necessary for the protection of the mortgaged premises, and the plaintiff prays that any sum or sums so paid, together with interest from the date of payment, shall be added to the plaintiffs claim and be deemed secured by said Note and Mortgage and adjudged a valid lien on the mortgaged premises, and that the plaintiff be paid such sums, together with interest thereon, out of the proceeds of the sale of the mortgaged premises. - 5 - 8 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 25. The Mortgage provides that, in the case of foreclosure, the mortgaged premises may be sold in one parcel. 26. The mortgaged premises under foreclosure herein is to be sold subject to any state of facts an accurate survey would show; and to covenants, restrictions, reservations, easem*nts and agreements of record, ifany, and any violations thereof; and to building restrictions and zoning ordinances of the town or municipality in which said mortgaged premises are situated, if any, and any violations thereof; and to conditional bills of sale, security agreements and financing statements filed in connection with said mortgaged premises, if any, but only to the extent that any of the foregoing are not barred or foreclosed by this action; and to existing tenancies, ifany, except such tenants who are parties defendants to this action; and to all unpaid real estate taxes, assessments, water charges and sewer rents, which are liens upon the premises but are not due or payable as of the time of the sale. In addition, the purchaser of the mortgaged premises at the foreclosure sale shall be required to pay all applicable local and state transfer taxes, deed stamps or other taxes due in connection with the transfer of the mortgaged premises. 27. The plaintiff shall not be deemed to have waived, altered, released or changed the election hereinbefore made by reason of the payment, after the date of the commencement of this action, of any or all of the defaults mentioned herein; and such election shall continue and remain effective until the costs and disbursem*nts of this action, and all present and future defaults under the Note and Mortgage and occurring prior to the discontinuance of this action are fully paid. 28. In the event the plaintiff possesses any other liens against the mortgaged premises either by way of a junior mortgage or otherwise, the plaintiff requests that such other liens shall not be merged into the cause of action set forth in this complaint, but that the plaintiff shall be - 6 - 9 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 permitted to enforce said other liens and seek determination of the priority thereof in any independent action or proceeding including without limitation any surplus money proceeding. 29. No prior action or proceeding has been commenced or is now pending to enforce the terms of the Mortgage, or any part thereof. WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants as follows: A. That each and all of the defendants in this action, and any and all persons claiming by, through and under any of them, subsequent to the commencement of this action and the filing of the notice of pendency of this action, may be forever barred and foreclosed of any and allright, titleand interest, claim, lien and equity of redemption in the mortgage Premises; B. That the Court direct that the Premises can be sold according to law, in one parcel or otherwise as equity may require; C. That the monies arising from the sale of the Premises may be brought into Court or paid to the plaintiff in accordance with RPAPL§ 1354. D. That the monies due to plaintiff on the Mortgage may be adjudged and computed; E. That plaintiff may be paid the amount adjudged to be due on the Mortgage with interest at the time of such payment, together with any monies advanced and paid pursuant to any term or provision of the Mortgage so as to protect the lien of the Mortgage, and together with taxes, insurance premiums and all other charges and liens paid thereon with interest upon said amount from the date of the respective payments and advances, together with all amounts due by virtue of statutory costs, allowances and attorney's fees, together with any reasonable attorney's fees over and above the amounts covered by the statutory attorney's fees, together with the expenses of the sale insofar as the amount of such monies properly applicable thereto will pay the same; - 7 - 10 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 F. That ifthe proceeds of the sale of the Premises are insufficient to pay the amount found due to plaintiff as set forth in the immediately preceding paragraph, the officer making the sale be required by the judgment of sale herein to specify the amount of such deficiency in the report of sale; G. That plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney's fees as provided in the Note and Mortgage, as well as the costs and disbursem*nts of this action; and H. That plaintiff has such other and further relief as may be just and proper. Dated: Roslyp Heights, New York Ä , b , 2018 DAVID L SSOCIATES LLP By: o David A Gallo, Attorneys for Plaintiff 99 Powerhouse Road - First Floor Roslyn Heights, NY 11577 (516) 583-5330 583-5333 - fax (516) - 8 - 11 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 VERIFICATIO_N STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF NASSAU David A. Gallo, ESQ. hereby affirms under the penalties of perjury and pursuant to CPLR 2106 that he/she is one of the attorneys for the plaintiff; that he/she has read the foregoing summons and complaint and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to his/her own knowledge except as to matters stated to be upon information and belief, and as to those matters he/she believes them to be true. The grounds of his/her belief as to matters not stated upon his/her knowledge are statements and/or records provided by the plaintiff, itsagents and/or employees attorneys' and contained in the file in the office. This verification is made pursuant to CPLR Section 3020(d)(3) as the Plaintiff is not in the county of Nassau, which is where plaintiff s attorneys' office is located. Dated: Nassa Copnty, New York )( ( i , 2018 - 9 - 12 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 Intracoastal Abstract Co., Inc. Search No.: MSGFN-3035340N State NEW YORK Town/City: Camden County Oneida Tax Designation Section 128.013 Block 2 Lot 65 Street No.: 88 3rd Street, Camden, N.Y. SCHEDULE A DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND situate in the Village and Town of Camden, County of Oneida and State of New York, being a part of Lot No. 9 as shown on a map of the Conant Block, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly line of Third Street, 126 feet south of the south line of Empey Avenue and at the southeast corner of the lotconveyed to Bert B. Anson and wife by F. H. Conant's Sons Inc., by Warranty Deed dated November 1, 1926 and recorded in the Oneida County Clerk's Office in Book 861 of Deeds at page 194; and RUNNING THENCE westerly along the southerly line of said Anson lot, 93 feetto the easterly line of the barn-yard, so called; THENCE southerly at right angles along the easterly line of said barn-yard, 45 feetto the southerly line of said Lot No. 9; THENCE easterly at right angles along the westerly line of Lot No. 9, 93 feetto the westerly line of Third Street; THENCE northerly along the westerly line of Third Street, 45 feetto the place of BEGINNING. Premises also known as 88 3rd Street, Camden, NY 13316 13 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 Depared by M.THLEGEft ,pct NOTE DECEMBER03, 2004 CAMDF,N NEW YORK [Dael ICmi [State) B8 3RD ST, CAMDEN, NY 13316 - 113 D [Þreperty Address] 1. UORROWEH'S PROMISE TO PAY B1œturn fhr a loan that I have received,I promiseto pay U.S $ 33 , 600 ..00 (this amount is Called"Primal"), plus interest,to the order of the Leader.The Lenderis COUNTRYWIDEHOMB LOANS, INC, l will makeall payments underthis Note m the form of cash,check or money order I undentand that the Lender may transfer this Note. The Ecnder or anyone who takes this Note by grainsfermid w is Holder " etimled to receivepaymentstmder EhisNote is called the'Note L INTEREST Imerestwil) be chargeden unpaid pl mcipal unni the full amount of Principal has beenpad. I will pay mterestancearly rateof 6. 250 %. t he mterestrate required by this SecImn2 is the raic I win pay hath heforeandafter any default describedm Sec1.g•6(B) of this Note 3. FAYMENTS (A) Time and Place of Payments I wdl pay prmcipal and ig1terest by making a paymentevery month I wUI make my monthly paymentoil the FIRST day of cachmemh beginmog on FEBRUARY 01 , 2005 l wUl make thesepayrnents every month until I have paid all of the prmcipal and mtett and any other chargesdescnbed below that I may owe under this Note. Each monthly paymentwdl be applied as of its sdJuled due date and will be applied m mtcrest before l'rmcipal Jf. onJANUARY 01. 2020 . ISilll owe amoums ttne this Date." Note, 1will pay thoseamountsin full on the dale,which is called the "Maturity I will make my monthly paymentsat P.O. Box 6GOG94., Dal las, TX 75264 0694 er at a different pilec if reqmredby theNote 1folder. (B) Amnunt of Mmithly Payntents My monthly paymentwŒ be m the amotmtof U S $ 28 8 09 4. 110RROWER'S RIGHT TO PREPAY [ hm,oEheright to make paymenisof Prinopal at any ume hefme they aredue A paymentof Pom.ipal only m km-1M & ''Prepayment," When I make p.Prepayment,I will tetl the Note llokler in wntmg that I am domg so. [ may not de9ratea paymentasa Prepaymetitif1 have not madeall the monthly paymentsdue underthe Note. I may make a fult Prepaymentur partiudPrepayrnentsmthout paymg a Prepaymentcharge.The Note Holder wdl.e my Prepaymentsgoreduce the amount of Pnncipal that l owe amler 1hn Note. llowever. the Note Holder may apply my Preymend to the accruedand unpaid intereston the Prepaymentalnount, beibre applying niy PrepaymtWto redtscethe Principal attmt of the Note it t inake a parnal Prepayment,there will he no changesm the due dwe or m the arnount of my monthly pment to timsechanget unicu tim Note Holder agreesin wntiq 5. I AIAN CHARGES If a law, which applies to this loan and which setsmaximum loan charget n jinally mierpretedso that the mterest other loan chargescollected or to be collecIcd m co1mectionwith thK Inan exceedthe perrmlltid Imots, lben (a) any such loatharge shall be reduced by the amoum necenary to reducethe elimge to the penmtted lumn, and (b| any sums already collect From me which exceededpermitted limits wdi be refundedto me f be Noto l[older may chooseto mate this refund by redmg the Principal I owe under this Note ar hy maicmga ducet paymenuIn me If a refimd redricesPrmegpA the reduchon will becated M à patial Prepayment. NtiWYORKFlXEDRATENOTE.Single FaurWy-Faonle Mae/Freddie MacUNIFORM (NSTRUMENT in·ims VMPMORTGAGEFORMS- GuD0)521-7291 -5N{NYj(00C15)o1 CHL(USTU2)(d) lige 1ofz Form33i/01 14 of 78 FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 08/27/2018 10:47 AM INDEX NO. EFCA2018-002477 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/27/2018 - . L H01t140WEIUS FAll..t)RE TO PAY AS REQUIRED (A) LaseCharge for Overdee Payments FI FTEEN If the Note Holder has not recowedthe full amountof any mombly paymentby the end of c ndar Pf rny daysaûer the date it ta due, 1will pay a latechargeto the Note IIolder. The amountof the chargewin be 2 , opo overduepaymentof priitcipal and mterest.I wdI pay this late chargepromptly but only once on eachlate payment (fl)
Related Contentin Oneida County
Case
Americu Credit Union v. Ricky Vanvalkenburg, Penny Vanvalkenburg
Aug 16, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |EFCA2024-002283
Case
Citibank, N.A. v. Christina Walker
Aug 09, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |EFCA2024-002223
Case
Midland Credit Management Inc. v. Gracie Mason aka Graciela Mason aka Graciela R Mason
Aug 07, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Debt Buyer Plaintiff |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Debt Buyer Plaintiff |EFCA2024-002173
Case
Aaron Worley v. Theodore Kubinski, Tonya Kubinski
Aug 09, 2024 |Torts - Other (Personal Injury) |Torts - Other (Personal Injury) |EFCA2024-002226
Case
Velocity Investments, Llc v. Donald Amarose
Aug 15, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Non-Card) Transaction |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Non-Card) Transaction |EFCA2024-002276
Case
Investigator Greenwood In Her Capacity As A Member Of Nysp v. Cameron B Zanker
Aug 15, 2024 |James P. McClusky |Special Proceedings - Extreme Risk Protection Order |Special Proceedings - Extreme Risk Protection Order |EFCA2024-002267
Case
Capital One Auto Finance v. Jeremy Mcnamara
Aug 16, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Non-Card) Transaction |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Non-Card) Transaction |EFCA2024-002286
Case
Nbt Bank, National Association v. Courtney D. Dantzler
Aug 09, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Non-Card) Transaction |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Non-Card) Transaction |EFCA2024-002213
Case
Velocity Investments Llc. v. Edgar Tejada
Aug 15, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Debt Buyer Plaintiff |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Debt Buyer Plaintiff |EFCA2024-002277
Ruling
LLOYD VS. LLOYD, ET AL
Aug 18, 2024 |CVCV20-0195922
LLOYD VS. LLOYD, ET ALCase Number: CVCV20-0195922This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of case and Plaintiff’s counsel. As discussed at multipleprevious hearings, Plaintiff may not proceed in pro per as she is representing the trust. An appearance isnecessary on today’s calendar.
Ruling
HOY-SUN NING YUNG BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION OF VS. THO QUANG TON ET AL
Aug 16, 2024 |CUD23673366
Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for August 16, 2024 line 6. DEFENDANT TON THO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT is continued to September 26, 2024 per stipulation and order. =(501/CFH) Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849). Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required. Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified and the opposing party does not appear.
Ruling
DANIEL MAHGEREFTEH VS ALEX NEHORAYAN, ET AL.
Aug 13, 2024 |24SMCV01892
Case Number: 24SMCV01892 Hearing Date: August 13, 2024 Dept: M CASE NAME: Mahgerefteh v. Nehorayan, et al. CASE NO.: 24SMCV01892 MOTION: Motion for Summary Judgment HEARING DATE: 8/13/2024 Legal Standard A party may move for summary judgment in any action or proceeding if it is contended the action has no merit or that there is no defense to the action or proceeding. (CCP, § 437c(a).) The purpose of the law of summary judgment is to provide courts with a mechanism to cut through the parties' pleadings in order to determine whether, despite their allegations, trial is in fact necessary to resolve their dispute. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843.) A party may move for summary adjudication as to one or more causes of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or one or more issues of duty, if the party contends that the cause of action has no merit, that there is no affirmative defense to the cause of action, that there is no merit to an affirmative defense as to any cause of action, that there is no merit to a claim for damages, as specified in¿Section 3294 of the Civil Code, or that one or more defendants either owed or did not owe a duty to the plaintiff or plaintiffs.¿(CCP,¿§ 437c(f)(1).)¿If a party seeks summary adjudication as an alternative to a request for summary judgment, the request must be clearly made in the notice of the motion. (Gonzales v. Superior Court¿(1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 1542, 1544.)¿ [A] party may move for summary adjudication of a legal issue or a claim for damages other than punitive damages that does not completely dispose of a cause of action, affirmative defense, or issue of duty pursuant to subdivision (t). (CCP,¿§ 437c(t).)¿ To prevail, the evidence submitted must show there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.¿(CCP, §¿437c(c).)¿The motion cannot succeed unless the evidence leaves no room for conflicting inferences as to material facts; the court has no power to weigh one inference against another or against other evidence. (Murillo v. Rite Stuff Food Inc. (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 833, 841.) In determining whether the facts give rise to a triable issue of material fact, [a]ll doubts as to whether any material, triable, issues of fact exist are to be resolved in favor of the party opposing summary judgment& (Gold v. Weissman (2004) 114 Cal.App.4th 1195, 1198-99.) In other words, the facts alleged in the evidence of the party opposing summary judgment and the reasonable inferences there from must be accepted as true. (Jackson v. County of Los Angeles (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 171, 179.) However, if adjudication is otherwise proper the motion may not be denied on grounds of credibility, except when¿a material fact is the witnesss¿state of mind and that fact is sought to be established solely by the [witnesss] affirmation thereof. (CCP, § 437c(e).)¿ Once the moving party has met their burden, the burden shifts to the opposing party to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto. (CCP § 437c(p)(1).) [T]here¿is no obligation on the opposing party... to establish anything by affidavit unless and until the moving party has by affidavit stated facts establishing every element... necessary to sustain a judgment in his favor.¿(Consumer Cause, Inc. v.¿SmileCare¿(2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 454, 468.)¿ ¿ The pleadings play a key role in a summary judgment motion. The function of the pleadings in a motion for summary judgment is to delimit the scope of the issues and to¿frame¿the outer measure of materiality in a summary judgment proceeding. (Hutton v. Fidelity National Title Co.¿(2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 486, 493, quotations and citations omitted.) Accordingly, the burden of a defendant moving for summary judgment only requires that he or she negate plaintiff's theories of liability¿as alleged in the complaint; that is, a moving party need not refute liability on some theoretical possibility not included in the pleadings. (Ibid.)¿ In an unlawful detainer action, notice of a motion for summary judgment must be given in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure sections 1013 and 1170.7. (CRC 3.1351(a).) CCP §¿1170.7 provides that a motion for summary judgment may be made at any time after the answer is filed upon giving five days notice. Summary judgment shall be granted or denied on the same basis as a motion under Section 437c. (CCP, §¿1170.7.) Any opposition to the motion and any reply to an opposition may be made orally at the time of hearing. (CRC 3.1351(b).) If a party seeks to have a written opposition considered in advance of the hearing, the written opposition must be filed and served on or before the court day before the hearing. (CRC 3.1351(c).) Service must be by personal delivery, facsimile transmission, express mail, or other means consistent with CCP §§¿1010-1013, and reasonably calculated to ensure delivery to the other party or parties no later than the close of business on the court day before the hearing. (Id.) The court, in its discretion, may consider written opposition filed later. (Id.) Analysis Plaintiff Daniel Mahgerefteh moves for summary judgment against Defendants Alex and Marjan Nehorayan on his unlawful detainer complaint. The basic elements of unlawful detainer are (1) the tenant is in possession of the premises; (2) that possession is without permission; (3) the tenant is in default[]; (4) the tenant has been properly served with a written three-day notice; and (5) the default continues after the three-day notice period has elapsed. (Kruger v. Reyes (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th Supp. 10, 16.) A three-day written notice to perform or quit is proper to evict tenants who have violated any other material covenant of their rental agreement. (CCP § 1161(3); see Civ. Code § 1946.2(c).) The sole issue before the court in an unlawful detainer action is the right to possession. (Briggs v. Electronic Memories & Magnetics Corp. (1975) 53 Cal.App.3d 900, 906.) Proving proper service on lessees of a valid three-day notice to pay or quit is essential to declaring lessors judgment for possession under Code of Civil Procedure section 1161. (Palm Property Investments, LLC v. Yadegar (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 1419, 1425.) Plaintiff owns the residential real property located at 719 North Bedford Drive; Beverly Hills, CA 90210. (UMF 1.) Defendants occupy the Premises pursuant to a written rental agreement (the Lease) and are the only named tenants on the Lease. (UMF 2; Mahgerefteh Decl., Ex. 1.) The Lease provides the following relevant provisions: 1. PROPERTY: The Premises are for the sole use as a personal residence by the following named person(s) only: Alex Nehorayan and Marjan Nehorayan. Any person in the Premises, other than those listed in this paragraph are considered guests. Guests are not permitted to stay more than 14 days written consent. [&] 17. ALTERATIONS; REPAIRS: Unless otherwise specified by law or paragraph 25C, without Housing Provider's prior written consent, (i) Tenant shall not make any repairs, alterations or improvements in or about the Premises including: painting, wallpapering, adding or changing locks, installing antenna or satellite dish(es), placing signs, displays or exhibits, or using screws, fastening devices, large nails or adhesive materials. [&] 27. TEMPORARY RELOCATION: Subject to local law, Tenant agrees, upon demand of Housing Provider, to temporarily vacate Premises for a reasonable period, to allow for fumigation (or other methods) to control wood destroying pests or organisms, or other repairs to Premises. Tenant agrees to comply with all instructions and requirements necessary to prepare Premises to accommodate pest control, fumigation or other work, including bagging or storage of food and medicine, and removal of perishables and valuables. Tenant shall only be entitled to a credit of Rent equal to the per diem Rent for the period of time Tenant is required to vacate Premises. (UMF 3; Mahgerefteh Decl., Ex. 1.) Plaintiff presents evidence that Defendants committed three material breaches of the Lease as to the above provisions, which provided the basis for their notice to quit. First, there are additional occupants residing at the Premises that are not listed as tenants in the Lease. (UMF 4.) Second, an unpermitted closet was built upstairs. (UMF 5.) Third, Defendants failed to comply with Plaintiffs request to temporarily vacate the Premises for repairs as required by the Lease. On March 13, 2024, Plaintiff sent Defendants a letter demanding Defendants temporarily vacate the Premises for unspecified repairs in accordance with paragraph 27 of the Lease and provided alternative housing options. (UMF 6.) The purpose of the repairs is not clear from the UMFs or from the attached demand letter. (Mahgerefteh Decl., Exs. 2-3.) The only potential repair mentioned is Plaintiffs demand that the closet be removed and brought back to its original condition. (Id.) Defendants failed to vacate or provide their preferred alternative housing. (UMF 6.) On April 8, 2024, Plaintiff served Defendants with a Notice to Cure or Quit (First Notice) at the Premises. (UMF 7.) Defendants failed to comply with the first notice. (UMF 8.) On April 12, 2024, Plaintiff served Defendants with a second Notice to Quit at the Premises. (UMF 9.) Defendants failed to comply with the second Notice. (UMF 10.) Additional Occupants Strictly construed, Plaintiff does not demonstrate a breach of paragraph 1 of the Lease. This paragraph states that The Premises are for the sole use as a personal residence by the following named person(s) only: Alex Nehorayan and Marjan Nehorayan. Any person in the Premises, other than those listed in this paragraph are considered guests. Guests are not permitted to stay more than 14 days without Housing Providers written consent. (Ex. 1, ¶ 1, emphasis added.) Plaintiff presents no evidence that the unauthorized co-occupants have stayed more than 14 days. With all reasonable inferences made in favor of the non-moving party, the Court must conclude that they are not unauthorized co-occupants but permitted guests as defined under the Lease. Furthermore, as to the co-occupants, Defendants submit evidence that the allegedly unauthorized co-occupants, Jonah Neborayan and Kayla Nehorayan, are their adult children who reside at the 5-bedroom premises with full knowledge of Plaintiff. (A. Nehorayan Decl., ¶¶ 4-6.) Defendants attach letters and texts messages from Plaintiff, acknowledging the existence of other occupants including their children during May 2023. (A. Nehorayan Decl., Ex. 1.) This creates a dispute of material fact as to Defendants permission to have their adult children living with them. Unpermitted Closet Plaintiff shows a breach of paragraph 17. Plaintiff presents evidence that Defendants added a closet to the premises, which could be considered as repairs, alterations or improvements to the premises. Plaintiff also argues that section 9-1-107 of the City of Beverly Hills municipal code would require a permit. Plaintiff does not furnish this section or provide sufficient argument legal argument on this point. Instead, Plaintiff proffers the declaration of counsel, who states that he talked to someone at the City of Beverly Hills, and they confirmed that a closet is a structure and would require a permit. Further, this additional basis for default is unstated in the Notices to Quit. Thus, the Court would limit the basis of the default to the breach of paragraph 17. With the above evidence, Plaintiff demonstrates that Defendants remain in default due to the unpermitted alteration of the Premises, to wit, the closet. Therefore, Plaintiff meets his burden to show a prima facie case of unlawful detainer on this basis. Defendants demonstrate a dispute of fact as to their breach and default regarding the closet. Defendants argue that Plaintiff waived the specific breaches in question. Waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a known right after knowledge of the facts. (Roesch v. De Mota (1944) 24 Cal.2d 563, 572.) A waiver of a contract provision may be express, based on the waiving partys words, or implied, based on conduct. (Lynch v. California Coastal Commission (2017) 3 Cal.5th 470, 475-476.) For example, waiver may apply where a party acts in manner inconsistent with intent to enforce a right. (Colony Ins. Co. v. Crusader Ins. Co. (2010) 188 Cal. App.4th 743, 753.) In the unlawful detainer context, it has long been held that a landlord's acceptance of rent with knowledge of breach of condition precludes forfeiture of the lease. (Kern Sunset Oil Co. v. Good Roads Oil Co., (1931) 214 Cal. 435, 440; see Salton Community Services Dist. v. Southard (1967) 256 Cal.App.2d 526 [waiver supported where sublessor accepted rent despite knowing for years about continued camping on premises].) The mere breach of a covenant in a lease does not effect its termination. [Citation.] On the happening of such a breach the lessor may elect to disregard it and continue the lease in effect, or rely upon it and declare a forfeiture. [Citation.] Conduct of the lessor, with knowledge of a breach, consistent with the continued existence of the lease and inconsistent with its termination by forfeiture supports an inference the lessor has waived the breach. [Citations.] Acceptance of benefits under the lease is such conduct. [Citation.] (Id. at 533.) It has also been repeatedly held that waiver of a particular breach of a continuing covenant does not waive subsequent similar breaches. (Budaef v. Huber (1961) 194 Cal. App. 2d 12, 20; citing Extension Oil Co. v. Richfield Oil Corp., (1944) 52 Cal.App.2d 105, 108-109 [explaining the nature of continuing covenants].) Defendants submit evidence that they constructed/repaired the complained-of closet with Plaintiffs permission. Mr. Nehorayan states that they had full permission to reinstate the closet to its previous use. (A. Nehorayan Decl., ¶ 7.) Mr. Nehorayan also cites a statement made by Itzhak Bokobza, who explains that in May 2023, he and Mahgerefteh inspected the Premises, and Mahgerefteh made several positive comments about the closet. (Id., Ex. 2.) This contradicts Mahgereftehs statement that he discovered the closet in November 2023. Accordingly, there is a dispute of fact as to whether Plaintiff waived Defendants breach of paragraph 17 by constructing a closet without written permission. Temporary Relocation There would also be a dispute of fact as to the default on the temporary relocation request and paragraph 27. The Lease only requires that tenants agree upon demand to temporarily vacate the Premises for a reasonable period to allow for other repairs to Premises and that they would follow all instructions and requirements necessary for such work. Plaintiff does not show the need for the repairs or that the proposed length of time (31 days) was reasonable. Therefore, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Defendants were obliged to relocate for a reasonable period of time for necessary work/repairs. Also, Plaintiff is not clear on what repairs or work was needed which required 31 days of temporary relocation. If Plaintiff desired to repair the closet back to its former state, then Defendants default would depend on whether Plaintiff permitted the closet. In other words, if Plaintiff waived his objection to the closet, then he would have necessarily waived his right to force Defendants to vacate the property for Plaintiff to remove the closet. Therefore, because there is a dispute of fact as to Plaintiffs authorization of the closet, there is also a dispute of fact as to the temporary relocation request. Plaintiff argues that he could not have waived these provisions because there is an anti-waiver provision in the Lease, stating at paragraph 31: The waiver of any breach shall not be construed as a continuing waiver of the same or any subsequent breach. However, Plaintiff presents no authority that a party cannot waive a particular breach in light of such a provision. Instead, Plaintiffs cited authority suggests that this provision would only operate to limit their waiver from applying to subsequent similar breaches. (Budaef, supra, 194 Cal. App. 2d at 20.) Accordingly, the motion is DENIED.
Ruling
JASON KRISTAL VS. TRILION CAPITAL FUND, LLC ET AL
Aug 15, 2024 |CGC24613604
Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for August 15, 2024 line 3. DEFENDANT TRILION CAPITAL FUND, LLC, TCF PROPERTIES, LLC, DAVID WEINER DEMURRER to COMPLAINT is SUSTAINED with leave to amend for Plaintiff to address all issues raised by the demurrer in good faith. Oversized opposition is stricken (No Table of Contents or Table of Authorities). Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED as to all exhibits except 16 and 17. Plaintiff shall have 10 days from the notice of entry of order to file an amended complaint. =(501/CFH) Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849). Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required. Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified, and the opposing party does not appear.
Ruling
RUSSELL M FRANDSEN, ET AL. VS ALEX FOXMAN, ET AL.
Aug 14, 2024 |24VECV00579
Case Number: 24VECV00579 Hearing Date: August 14, 2024 Dept: T 24VECV00579 Frandsen v Foxman Ex parte application to advance: Denied. The court is extremely busy at the present while being in a jury trial and having a full morning calendar. There is no emergency for the court to wedge this case into an already busy calendar. The court reviewed the opposition and notes that the defendants are willing to sign a stipulation for possession pending the hearing. If this is being offered at no loss to plaintiffs, it is unclear why the offer has not been accepted.
Ruling
BINFORD ROAD LLC VS PAUL DEN BESTE
Aug 15, 2024 |CV2104251
DATE: 08/13/24 TIME: 1:30 P.M. DEPT: A CASE NO: CV2104251PRESIDING: HON. STEPHEN P. FRECCEROREPORTER: CLERK: RON BAKERPLAINTIFF: BINFORD ROAD LLC vs.DEFENDANT: PAUL DEN BESTENATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION — OTHER: TO APPOINT SUCCESSORRECEIVER, ETC. RULINGBefore the Court is Defendant Paul Den Beste’s (“Defendant”) motion for the appointment of asuccessor receiver. The parties appeared for a case management conference on August 9, 2024and agreed that the motion should be granted. The hearing set for August 13, 2024 is thereforeVACATED and the motion is GRANTED.The Court notes, however, Defendant asserts in his moving papers that the receiver is an“indispensable” party to this litigation. To the extent Defendant seeks to join any party to thislitigation, whether indispensable or otherwise, or to the extent he seeks other relief, he may onlydo so only through a properly noticed motion set for hearing before the Court. The Court’spresent order is limited to granting the request for appointment of a successor trustee.As set forth at the case management conference, the parties shall file and serve their nominationsfor a receiver and proposed order for the receivership as follows: 1 The parties submit nominations, together with a summary of qualifications for the nominee, along with a proposed order for the receivership on August 16, 2024. 2. Any objections or response to the opposing side’s submission on August 23, 2024.Unless otherwise ordered, the Court will take the matter under submission and issue an orderwithout a hearing.CV2104251 All parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.10(B)to contest the tentative decision. Parties who request oral argument are required to appear inperson or remotely by ZOOM. Regardless of whether a party requests oral argument inaccordance with Rule 2.10(B), the prevailing party shall prepare an order consistent with theannounced ruling as required by Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.11. The Zoom appearance information for August, 2024 is as follows: https:/Avww.zoomgov.com/j/1602925171?pwd=NUdsaVlabHNrNjZGZjFsVjVSTUVqQT09 Meeting ID: 160 292 5171 Passcode: 868745 If you are unable to join by video, you may join by telephone by calling (669) 254-5252and using the above-provided passcode, Zoom appearance information may also be found onthe Court’s website: https:/Avww.marin.courts.ca.go'Page 2 of 2
Ruling
NISHAN ABEYRATNE VS DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ET AL.
Aug 15, 2024 |24AHCV00009
Case Number: 24AHCV00009 Hearing Date: August 15, 2024 Dept: 3 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT NISHAN ABEYRATNE, Plaintiff(s), vs. DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE, INC., et al., Defendant(s). ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO.: 24AHCV00009 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT NEWREZ LLC DBA SHELLPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICINGS DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE Dept. 3 8:30 a.m. August 15, 2024 Plaintiff Nishan Abeyratne (Plaintiff) dismissed moving party Newrez LLC dba Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing on June 26, 2024. Accordingly, the demurrer and motion to strike are taken off calendar. Dated this 15th day of August 2024 William A. Crowfoot Judge of the Superior Court Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.
Ruling
BINFORD ROAD LLC VS PAUL DEN BESTE
Aug 13, 2024 |CV2104251
DATE: 08/13/24 TIME: 1:30 P.M. DEPT: A CASE NO: CV2104251PRESIDING: HON. STEPHEN P. FRECCEROREPORTER: CLERK: RON BAKERPLAINTIFF: BINFORD ROAD LLC vs.DEFENDANT: PAUL DEN BESTENATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION — OTHER: TO APPOINT SUCCESSORRECEIVER, ETC. RULINGBefore the Court is Defendant Paul Den Beste’s (“Defendant”) motion for the appointment of asuccessor receiver. The parties appeared for a case management conference on August 9, 2024and agreed that the motion should be granted. The hearing set for August 13, 2024 is thereforeVACATED and the motion is GRANTED.The Court notes, however, Defendant asserts in his moving papers that the receiver is an“indispensable” party to this litigation. To the extent Defendant seeks to join any party to thislitigation, whether indispensable or otherwise, or to the extent he seeks other relief, he may onlydo so only through a properly noticed motion set for hearing before the Court. The Court’spresent order is limited to granting the request for appointment of a successor trustee.As set forth at the case management conference, the parties shall file and serve their nominationsfor a receiver and proposed order for the receivership as follows: 1 The parties submit nominations, together with a summary of qualifications for the nominee, along with a proposed order for the receivership on August 16, 2024. 2. Any objections or response to the opposing side’s submission on August 23, 2024.Unless otherwise ordered, the Court will take the matter under submission and issue an orderwithout a hearing.CV2104251 All parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.10(B)to contest the tentative decision. Parties who request oral argument are required to appear inperson or remotely by ZOOM. Regardless of whether a party requests oral argument inaccordance with Rule 2.10(B), the prevailing party shall prepare an order consistent with theannounced ruling as required by Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.11. The Zoom appearance information for August, 2024 is as follows: https:/Avww.zoomgov.com/j/1602925171?pwd=NUdsaVlabHNrNjZGZjFsVjVSTUVqQT09 Meeting ID: 160 292 5171 Passcode: 868745 If you are unable to join by video, you may join by telephone by calling (669) 254-5252and using the above-provided passcode, Zoom appearance information may also be found onthe Court’s website: https:/Avww.marin.courts.ca.go'Page 2 of 2
Document
Sylvia Stinger v. Mohawk Garden Apartments, Llc, Joanne Huxley
Aug 07, 2024 |Torts - Other Negligence (Premises Liability) |Torts - Other Negligence (Premises Liability) |EFCA2024-002179
Document
State Of New York v. Cobey James Lloyd
Aug 16, 2024 |Commercial - Contract |Commercial - Contract |EFCA2024-002289
Document
Wktv, Llc/Heartland Media Llc v. Assessor Of The Town Of Deerfield, Board Of Assessment Review Of The Town Of Deerfield, The Town Of Deerfield, Oneida County, New York
Jul 24, 2024 |Peter M. Rayhill |Real Property - Tax Certiorari |Real Property - Tax Certiorari |EFCA2024-002022
Document
American Express National Bank v. Kandi Humpf aka Kandi M Humpf
Aug 15, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |EFCA2024-002271
Document
Pennymac Loan Services, Llc v. Ray L. Kellogg Jr., Ashley M. Goodman, Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development C/O United States Attorneys Office For The Northern District Of New York, Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development C/O United States Attorney General/Department Of Justice, Mohawk Valley Health System, John Doe And Jane Doe Said Names Being Fictitious, It Being The Intention Of Plaintiff To Designate Any And All Occupants Of Premises Being Foreclosed Herein
Jul 24, 2024 |Real Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential |Real Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential |EFCA2024-002030
Document
Americu Credit Union v. Esmeralda Nazario
Aug 07, 2024 |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |Other Matters - Consumer Credit (Card) Original Creditor Plaintiff |EFCA2024-002221
Document
Brian Matt, Chandra Matt Individually and as Parents and Legal Guardians of O.M., an infant v. Melissa Caldwell, Gwen Caldwell
Aug 15, 2024 |Torts - Other (Personal Injury) |Torts - Other (Personal Injury) |EFCA2024-002268
Document
State Of New York v. Haleigh Anne Marleau
Aug 16, 2024 |Commercial - Contract |Commercial - Contract |EFCA2024-002290
