Summary
This Appellate Division decision addresses a mortgage foreclosure action where the plaintiff sought a default judgment against multiple defendants. The court affirmed the lower court's order dismissing the complaint as abandoned against certain defendants under CPLR 3215(c) due to the plaintiff's failure to take proceedings within one year of their defaults. Additionally, the court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal regarding the consent-based dismissal of claims against another defendant, noting that a consenting party cannot be aggrieved by such an order.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the appellate division should affirm the trial court’s order dismissing the complaint against Carl A. Mitchell on consent and whether the plaintiff’s failure to seek entry of judgment within one year constitutes a reasonable excuse under CPLR 3215(c)
Holdings
- The appeal is dismissed and the order dismissing the complaint against Mitchell on consent is affirmed.
- The plaintiff’s delay is not a reasonable excuse; the dismissal as abandoned is proper.
Key quotations
“It is axiomatic that a party who consents to an order cannot be considered aggrieved by it”
“CPLR 3215(c) provides that if a plaintiff fails to take proceedings for the entry of judgment within one year after the default, then the court shall not enter judgment but shall dismiss the complaint as abandoned . . . upon its own initiative or on motion, unless sufficient cause is shown why the complaint should not be dismissed”
Factual background
In 2006 Angelise Jackson executed a $393,750 note secured by a Brooklyn mortgage. The mortgage was assigned to Wells Fargo Bank, then to US Bank Trust National Association. The plaintiff filed a foreclosure action in 2016. Jackson moved to dismiss as abandoned under CPLR 3215(c); the trial court denied, but the appellate division previously reversed that denial. US Bank later moved for default judgment against all defendants except Jackson and for reference, while Mitchell cross‑moved to dismiss as abandoned.
Procedural history
The plaintiff appealed the Supreme Court, Kings County's order denying US Bank's motions for default judgment and reference, and directing dismissal of the complaint against Carl A. Mitchell. The appellate division affirmed the order and dismissed the portion of the appeal concerning Mitchell's dismissal.