Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Roberta L. KOEPPEL, et al., appellants, v. CARLANDIA CORPORATION, et al., respondents.
In an action, inter alia, to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dillon, J.), entered December 12, 2003, which granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5), and (2) a judgment of the same court entered December 24, 2003, which, upon the order, is in favor of the defendants and against them dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants.
The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of a judgment in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5501[a][1] ).
We agree with the Supreme Court that this action is barred by the six-year statute of limitations applicable to an action to foreclose a mortgage (see CPLR 213[4] ). The six-year statute of limitations began to run upon the acceleration of the mortgage debt (see Notarnicola v. Lafayette Farms, 288 A.D.2d 198, 733 N.Y.S.2d 91; EMC Mtge. Corp. v. Patella, 279 A.D.2d 604, 720 N.Y.S.2d 161; Loiacono v. Goldberg, 240 A.D.2d 476, 477, 658 N.Y.S.2d 138; see also Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v. Mebane, 208 A.D.2d 892, 618 N.Y.S.2d 88; Thompson v. Willson, 183 Misc. 949, 952, 51 N.Y.S.2d 665, affd. 269 App.Div. 829, 56 N.Y.S.2d 415), and expired before the commencement of this action on May 21, 2003.
The parties' remaining contentions are either without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: September 06, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)