Justice Thomas Whelan
In an uncontested mortgage foreclosure action plaintiff Citimortgage sought to vacate the judgment it obtained. Guarino opposed, but as he was in default, which was not vacated, he was without authority to oppose or participate on this motion. Citimortgage contended it was unable to comply with affirmation requirements imposed on its counsel under Administrative Orders 548-10 and 431-11. The court found this application in conflict with well established legal maxims of finality, and fundamental principles governing the independent adjudication of cases, including the waste of limited judicial resources. It stated vacatur of final adjudicatory documents and re-litigation of the causes determined there was generally precluded by the finality doctrine. The court stated as no facts constituting any one of the grounds necessary to support vacatur of the judgment was advanced, same was unavailable to Citimortgage. Also, as no new affidavit of merit or attorney’s affirmation were attached as submissions, these omissions, coupled with the court’s finding that judgments of foreclosure and sale which remained unchallenged should not be subject to vacatur due to an inability to comply with “orders” promulgated by court administrators, warranting a denial of this motion.
