By Duffy, J.P.; Rivera, Dowling, Taylor, JJ.
RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2013-TT2, ETC., app, v. ANYANWU KAODICHIMMA, res — (Index No. 24683/08) Berkman Henoch Peterson Peddy & Fenchel, P.C., Garden City, NY (Bruce J. Bergman and Radjai D. Singh of counsel), for appellant. Berg & David, PLLC, Brooklyn, NY (Abraham David and Sholom Wohlgelernter of counsel), for respondent. In an action to recover on a promissory note, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mark Partnow, J.), dated January 2, 2020. The order denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the second amended complaint and to strike the defendant’s answer. ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs. In August 2008, the plaintiff’s predecessor in interest commenced this action which originally sought to foreclose a mortgage securing certain real property in Brooklyn. In November 2016, the Supreme Court, inter alia, granted the plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the amended complaint, and to substitute itself as the plaintiff in this action. The second amended complaint contained only one cause of action which was to recover on a promissory note that the plaintiff alleged the defendant had executed but had defaulted upon by failing to make the required payments thereunder. The defendant interposed an answer, asserting several affirmative defenses, including that the plaintiff lacked standing. Thereafter, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the second amended complaint and to strike the defendant’s answer, and the defendant opposed. In an order dated January 2, 2020, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiff’s motion on the ground that the plaintiff failed to establish its standing as holder of the note. The plaintiff appeals.
