Moreover, by commencing the first foreclosure action, it placed the appellant on notice that it was holding her in default under the note and mortgage and that the debt was being accelerated (see EMC Mtge. Contrary to the appellant's contention, the statute of limitations began to run when the plaintiff's predecessor in interest, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., elected to accelerate the subject mortgage in January 1995 (see Loiacono v Goldberg, 240 AD2d 476, 477 ). We agree with the Supreme Court that this action was timely commenced. Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff. Ordered that the order dated December 11, 2003, is affirmed insofar as appealed from and it is further, Ordered that the appeal from the order dated November 21, 2003, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated Decemand it is further, In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Linda Marie Smith appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Martin, J.), dated November 21, 2003, and (2), as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the same court dated December 11, 2003, as granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against her and the appointment of a referee.
Linda Marie Smith, Appellant, et al., Defendants. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.Īs corrected through Wednesday, July 20, 2005
0 kommentar(er)
