U.S. Bank N.A. v Thompson

Annotate this Case
U.S. Bank N.A. v Thompson 2018 NY Slip Op 05403 Decided on July 19, 2018 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on July 19, 2018
Friedman, J.P., Mazzarelli, Kapnick, Webber, Moulton, JJ.
20428/06 5465A 5465

[*1] U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for the Structured Asset Investment Loan Trust, 2006-BNC2, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Nancy Thompson, Defendant-Appellant, Lagoon Estates Condominium, et al., Defendants.



The Wilson Law Firm LLC, Brooklyn (Earl A. Wilson of counsel), for appellant.

Reed Smith LLP, New York (Zalika T. Pierre of counsel), for respondent.



Judgment of foreclosure and sale, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth L. Thompson, J.), entered February 4, 2016, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered February 4, 2016, which granted plaintiff's motion for a judgment of foreclosure and denied defendant Nancy Thompson's cross motion to vacate a default and file a late answer, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

Defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her delay in appearing or answering the complaint (see Bank of N.Y. v Singh, 139 AD3d 486, 486 [1st Dept 2016]). Since she failed to timely appear or answer, she waived the issue of standing (see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Jones, 139 AD3d 520, 524 [1st Dept 2016]; Wells Fargo Bank, NA v Edwards, 95 AD3d 692, 692 [1st Dept 2012]).

The Decision and Order of this Court entered herein on January 16, 2018 (157 AD3d 547 [1st Dept 2018]) is hereby recalled and vacated (see M-886 decided simultaneously herewith).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JULY 19, 2018

CLERK



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.