My question involves court procedures for the state of: New York
I am new and very grateful to this forum and appreciate any information regarding my question. I am involved in a foreclosure action in NY. I filed an answer, affirmative defenses and several crossclaims, one of which was quiet title. An answer was filed, however it was not only late but has defective verification, so it was rejected based upon that and returned with a letter and explanation.
The issues surrounding my foreclosure, is I am challenging standing based upon improper assignment and robo signing, there is no evidence of proper assignment and actual transfer and the banks affidavit mentions not one word of assignment or transfer or any dates, be that as it may, they opposed a motion to dismiss based upon being the lawful assignee, yet in defense of the quiet title action, the bank affirmatively denies the following:
180. The Plaintiff herein claims an interest and estate in the property adverse to the defendant in that Plaintiff asserts it is the owner of the note secured by the mortgage to the property, the subject of this suit.
181. That Plaintiff claims an interest and estate in the property adverse to the defendant in that Plaintiff asserts it is the owner of mortgage securing the
note the property, the subject of this suit.
The exact response was:
“Paragraphs 180 and 181 of the answer contain legal conclusions to which no response is required, however, to the extent a response is required, Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Paragraphs 180 and 181 of the Answer”
183 of the cross claim states:
The claims of plaintiff claim some estate, right, title, lien or interest in or to the property adverse to Defendants title, and these claims constitute a cloud on Defendants title to the property.
The answer
“Paragraph 183 of the Answer contains legal conclusion to which no response is required, however, to the extent a response is required, Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 183 of the Answer.”
As you can see these denials are just the opposite of what is required to prove foreclosure, so should the court not dismiss for admitted lack of standing? Should I advise the court via a motion for default or summary judgment? The specific denials appear to be against the specifics of the complaint, as being the lawful owner and holder of the note and mortgage on the basis of assignment and possession of same. Also, because I challenged standing in my cross claims, they now come back and assert an affirmative defense of Ratification, is that not also an admission that the facts of the complaint are meritless or at minimum not what they are moving the court under as there should be no need for ratification of the an assignment which was to occur prior to filing of the complaint?
I am new and very grateful to this forum and appreciate any information regarding my question. I am involved in a foreclosure action in NY. I filed an answer, affirmative defenses and several crossclaims, one of which was quiet title. An answer was filed, however it was not only late but has defective verification, so it was rejected based upon that and returned with a letter and explanation.
The issues surrounding my foreclosure, is I am challenging standing based upon improper assignment and robo signing, there is no evidence of proper assignment and actual transfer and the banks affidavit mentions not one word of assignment or transfer or any dates, be that as it may, they opposed a motion to dismiss based upon being the lawful assignee, yet in defense of the quiet title action, the bank affirmatively denies the following:
180. The Plaintiff herein claims an interest and estate in the property adverse to the defendant in that Plaintiff asserts it is the owner of the note secured by the mortgage to the property, the subject of this suit.
181. That Plaintiff claims an interest and estate in the property adverse to the defendant in that Plaintiff asserts it is the owner of mortgage securing the
note the property, the subject of this suit.
The exact response was:
“Paragraphs 180 and 181 of the answer contain legal conclusions to which no response is required, however, to the extent a response is required, Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Paragraphs 180 and 181 of the Answer”
183 of the cross claim states:
The claims of plaintiff claim some estate, right, title, lien or interest in or to the property adverse to Defendants title, and these claims constitute a cloud on Defendants title to the property.
The answer
“Paragraph 183 of the Answer contains legal conclusion to which no response is required, however, to the extent a response is required, Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 183 of the Answer.”
As you can see these denials are just the opposite of what is required to prove foreclosure, so should the court not dismiss for admitted lack of standing? Should I advise the court via a motion for default or summary judgment? The specific denials appear to be against the specifics of the complaint, as being the lawful owner and holder of the note and mortgage on the basis of assignment and possession of same. Also, because I challenged standing in my cross claims, they now come back and assert an affirmative defense of Ratification, is that not also an admission that the facts of the complaint are meritless or at minimum not what they are moving the court under as there should be no need for ratification of the an assignment which was to occur prior to filing of the complaint?
Pleadings: New York Foreclosure, Did Bank Admit They Have No Standing
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire