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.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Respondent, v. Martha C. TORRES, et al., Defendants, Edward S. Raskin, et al., Appellants.
In a mortgage foreclosure action, the defendants Edward S. Raskin and Rochelle E. Raskin appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gerard, J.), entered March 6, 1996, as granted the plaintiff's motion for leave to renew a prior motion for summary judgment and, upon renewal, granted summary judgment to the plaintiff.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff's prior motion for summary judgment was denied because the plaintiff failed to include a legible copy of an assignment of the mortgage in question, and failed to include an affidavit by a person with knowledge attesting to the default of the mortgagor. Under the circumstances of this case, the court properly exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff's motion for leave to renew, which corrected the deficiencies in the original motion papers (see, Canzoneri v. Wigand Corp., 168 A.D.2d 593, 564 N.Y.S.2d 178).
The appellants' contentions regarding improper service of the original summons and complaint and the amended summons and complaint were waived by their answer to the amended complaint in which they failed to challenge personal jurisdiction (see, Keary v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc., 96 A.D.2d 499, 465 N.Y.S.2d 518). Additionally, that the appellants may not have received service of the supplemental amended summons and complaint is, at worst, an irregularity which the court may, and in this case should, ignore, as no prejudice resulted (see, Patrician Plastic Corp. v. Bernadel Realty Corp., 25 N.Y.2d 599, 607-608, 307 N.Y.S.2d 868, 256 N.E.2d 180).
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
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: April 07, 1997
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)