National Coll. Student Loan Trust 2006-1 v Townsend

[*1] National Coll. Student Loan Trust 2006-1 v Townsend 2018 NY Slip Op 50223(U) Decided on February 20, 2018 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on February 20, 2018
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, P.J., Gonzalez, Cooper, JJ.
570554/17

National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-1, Plaintiff-Respondent,

against

Nathaniel Townsend, Defendant-Appellant, -and- Carmen Pearce, Defendant.

Defendant Nathaniel Townsend appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Llinet M. Rosado, J.), entered January 24, 2017, which granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint and denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment.

Per Curiam.

Appeal from order (Llinet M. Rosado, J.), entered January 24, 2017, deemed an appeal from the ensuing judgment (same court and Judge), entered March 9, 2017, and so considered (see CPLR 5520[c]), judgment affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting documentary evidence establishing that defendant executed a credit agreement with (nonparty) Sovereign Bank for a student loan in the amount of $6,000, that defendant defaulted on his obligations to repay the principal with interest, and that Sovereign transferred to plaintiff the rights under the agreement (see New York State Higher Educ. Servs. Corp. v Feher, 291 AD2d 736, 737 [2002], lv dismissed and denied 98 NY2d 718 [2002]).

In opposition, defendant failed to establish the existence of a triable issue of fact sufficient to withstand summary judgment. Contrary to defendant's arguments, the documents relied upon by the court in reaching its determination consisted of business records, a well-recognized exception to the hearsay rule (see New York State Higher Educ. Servs. Corp. v Barry, 267 AD2d 567 [1999]). Plaintiff additionally established its standing to maintain this action by submitting documentary proof that the loan was transferred.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: February 20, 2018