Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v. Barnes

Wells Fargo Is Entitled to Judgment Against Defendants Who Defaulted on Mortgage Payment

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDERI. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Wells Fargo, N.A. brought this diversity action against Defendants Todd M. Barnes and Katrina A. Zineelabidine under Article 13 of the New York Real Property Actions and Proceeding Law (“RPAPL”), N.Y. Real Prop. Acts. Law §§1301-1391, seeking to foreclose a mortgage encumbering 396 State Highway 7 in Unadilla, New York, “together with the land, buildings and other improvements located on the Property.” (Dkt. No. 1). Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s third motion for summary judgment against Defendant Zineelabidine and default judgment against Defendant Barnes.¹ (Dkt. No. 40). Defendant Zineelabidine opposes the motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 41). Defendant Barnes has not appeared in this action. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff’s motion is granted.II. PROCEDURAL HISTORYIn its prior Memorandum-Decision and Order, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion without prejudice to refiling with a “copy of the complaint attached to the notice of pendency” as filed in the Otsego County Clerk’s Office, because, inter alia, there was no indication that “Plaintiff filed the Complaint with any of the notices of pendency” as required by section 6511(a) of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (“CPLR”). (Dkt. No. 36, at 7-8). On May 18, 2018, Plaintiff submitted a status report and attached the notice of pendency filed in the Otsego County Clerk’s Office, demonstrating that it was filed with a copy of the Complaint in compliance with CPLR 6511(a). (Dkt. No. 38).On May 25, 2018, Plaintiff renewed its motion for summary judgment, default judgment, and judgment of foreclosure and sale. (Dkt. No. 40).III. BACKGROUND²The Court assumes the parties’ familiarity with the background set forth in its prior Memorandum-Decision and Order. (See Dkt. No. 36, at 2-3). Plaintiff is a “national banking association with its principal executive office [in] South Dakota,” and Defendants are both citizens of New York. (Dkt. No. 1,

2-4; Dkt. No. 40-3,

Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v. Barnes

Wells Fargo Is Entitled to Judgment Against Defendants Who Defaulted on Mortgage Payment

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal