Justice Richard M. Platkin

 

Read Full-Text Decision

In an action to foreclose upon a residential mortgage, plaintiff US Bank National Association, as Trustee for SASCO Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-RF4, moved for summary judgment. The court granted the motion, finding that plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to summary jugdment and that defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to his affirmative defenses and/or counterclaims. Defendant argued that plaintiff lacks standing to commence this action as the note and mortgage were transferred into the SASCO Trust in violation of the pooling service agreement and/or Estates, Powers and Trust Law § 7­2.4. The court found this argument without merit because defendant, “as a mortgagor whose loan [was] owned by a trust, does not have standing to challenge the plaintiff’s possession or status as assignee of the note and mortgage based on purported noncompliance with certain provisions of the [service agreement].” The court added that defendant’s unsupported speculation that the existence of a prior, discontinued foreclosure action against him suggests the existence of irregularities in the chain of title to his loan likewise fails to raise a triable issue of fact.

Justice Richard M. Platkin

 

Read Full-Text Decision

In an action to foreclose upon a residential mortgage, plaintiff US Bank National Association, as Trustee for SASCO Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-RF4, moved for summary judgment. The court granted the motion, finding that plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to summary jugdment and that defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to his affirmative defenses and/or counterclaims. Defendant argued that plaintiff lacks standing to commence this action as the note and mortgage were transferred into the SASCO Trust in violation of the pooling service agreement and/or Estates, Powers and Trust Law § 7­2.4. The court found this argument without merit because defendant, “as a mortgagor whose loan [was] owned by a trust, does not have standing to challenge the plaintiff’s possession or status as assignee of the note and mortgage based on purported noncompliance with certain provisions of the [service agreement].” The court added that defendant’s unsupported speculation that the existence of a prior, discontinued foreclosure action against him suggests the existence of irregularities in the chain of title to his loan likewise fails to raise a triable issue of fact.