BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
06-2-0456 Capital One N.A. v. Finmar Associates, App. Div. (per curiam) (11 pp.) Defendant obtained a loan from North Fork Bank secured by a commercial mortgage and personal guarantees, but failed to make any payment. Plaintiff, which had acquired North Fork Bank through a merger, filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, breach of contract for default of payment obligations. Eventually, default judgment was entered, the judge finding that Capital One had standing to enforce the note and defendants failed to satisfy the requisites of Rule 4:43-3. Defendants appeal the denial of their motion pursuant to Rule 4:50-1 to vacate the default judgment and for permission to file an answer to assert both excusable neglect and Capital One's alleged lack of standing. The panel affirms, finding that defendants are not entitled to relief because they have not shown that the failure to answer or otherwise appear and defend was excusable under the circumstances and they have not shown a meritorious defense since Capital One has standing because it was vested with the right to sue on the instruments without having to present a separate assignment of the instruments by virtue of the merger.
