Bank of Am., N.A. v. Levada

2025 NY Slip Op 05056 · Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · September 24, 2025 · No. Index No. 8063/13

Summary

This Appellate Division, Second Department decision affirms a lower court order granting the plaintiff bank's motion for leave to renew its opposition to a defendant's motion for summary judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action. The court found that a subsequent Court of Appeals reversal in Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kessler regarding strict compliance with Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law § 1304 notice requirements constituted a sufficient change in decisional law to justify the renewal. Consequently, the trial court properly vacated its prior order and denied the defendant's motion.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P.; ROBERT J. MILLER; CARL J. LANDICINO; PHILLIP HOM, JJ.
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
September 24, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 8063/13
Procedural posture
Appeal from order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County entered November 8, 2023
Precedential value
published
Parties
Maria Levada v. Bank of America, N.A.
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

foreclosuremortgagessummary judgmentcivil procedure

Practice areas

real estatecivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a motion for leave to renew must be granted when there has been a change in the law, including a clarification of decisional law, and whether the appellate division should affirm the trial court’s order entered November 8, 2023.

Holdings

  1. A motion for leave to renew must demonstrate that there has been a change in the law that would change the prior determination; a clarification of the decisional law is a sufficient change in the law to support renewal.
  2. The appellate division affirmed the order entered November 8, 2023, insofar as appealed from.

Key quotations

As relevant here, a motion for leave to renew must demonstrate that there has been a change in the law that would change the prior determination. (at 1)
A clarification of the decisional law is a sufficient change in the law to support renewal. (at 1)

Factual background

Bank of America sought to foreclose a mortgage on real property in Nassau County. Maria Levada opposed the foreclosure, moving for summary judgment and later for leave to renew her opposition after the trial court had granted the plaintiff's motion and entered a foreclosure judgment. The trial court vacated the judgment in 2022 due to alleged deficiencies in notice under RPAPL 1304, but the Court of Appeals reversed that vacatur. The plaintiff again sought renewal of its opposition, arguing a change in the law.

Procedural history

Bank of America commenced a foreclosure action in 2013. The Supreme Court, Nassau County granted summary judgment and entered a foreclosure judgment in 2018. The defendant later moved to renew opposition to that judgment. The trial court vacated the judgment in 2022 based on notice requirements under RPAPL 1304, but the Court of Appeals reversed that decision in 2023. The plaintiff then moved to renew its opposition; the appellate division granted leave to renew and vacated the 2022 order, affirming the November 8, 2023 order.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…