Dovenmuehle Mtge., Inc. v Mobley
Annotate this CaseDecided on December 21, 2016
Supreme Court, Kings County
Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc., Plaintiff,
against
Joy Mobley a/k/a JOY CHAMBERS, Defendant.
514886/2015
Plaintiff was represented by Nicole Falcey, Esq.
Defendant was represented by Tomer Y. Goldstein, Esq.
Genine D. Edwards, J.
The following papers numbered 1 to 3 read herein:Papers Numbered
Notice of Motion, Memorandum of Law 1
Affirmation in Opposition 2
Affirmation in Reply3
In this action for breach of contract, inter alia, defendant moves for summary
judgment.
In May of 2010, defendant entered into a loan modification agreement with LNV Corporation regarding 28 Kossuth Place, Brooklyn, New York (subject premises). The loan amount was $559,000.00. Apparently, the amount was split whereby defendant would remit monthly payments on $396,870.92 and a balloon payment of $162,129.08 would be due at maturity of the loan.
Subsequently, in June 2015, defendant entered into a contract to sell the subject premises. Defendant requested and received a payoff letter from MCG, a servicer on behalf of LNV Corporation, in the amount of $390,785.62. The closing was held on July 27, 2015, and LNV Corporation was in attendance. Defendant paid all outstanding debts including the mortgage from LNV Corporation. Indeed, LNV Corporation cashed the check from defendant in the amount of $390,785.62. On September 11, 2015, LNV Corporation filed a Satisfaction/Discharge of a Mortgage for the amount of $559,000.00. [*2]Allegedly, the balloon payment was assigned to plaintiff on or about November 30, 2015. In December 2015, plaintiff interposed this action for remittance of the balloon payment.
The doctrine of estoppel must be applied to these facts. To establish an estoppel there must be a reliance upon another's actions; the reliance was justifiable; and in consequence of that reliance a prejudicial change in position occurred. Flushing Unique Homes, LLC v. Brooklyn Federal Sav. Bank, 100 AD3d 956, 954 N.Y.S.2d 606 (2d Dept. 2012); Banco Popular North America v. Lieberman, 22 Misc 3d 1, 871 N.Y.S.2d 798 (1st Dept. 2008); First Union Nat. Bank v. Tecklenburg, 2 AD3d 575, 769 N.Y.S.2d 573 (2nd Dept. 2003). This matter is on all fours, defendant relied on the payoff letter she received from LNV Corporation, defendant's reliance was justifiable and defendant prejudicially changed her position by selling the subject premises, relocating and purchasing another home in the State of Georgia. See Regions Bank v. Campbell, 291 AD2d 437, 737 N.Y.S.2d 636 (2d Dept. 2002).
Furthermore, the Satisfaction/Discharge of a Mortgage, filed by LNV Corporation amounts to a release of defendant's responsibility under the mortgage. "[A] signed release shifts the burden of going forward ... to the [plaintiff] to show that there has been fraud, duress or some other fact which will be sufficient to void the release." Warmhold v. Zagarino, _____ AD3d _____, 40 N.Y.S.3d 499 (2d Dept. 2016) (quoting Davis v. Rochdale Vil. Inc., 109 AD3d 867, 971 N.Y.S.2d 340); Mew Equity, LLC v. Sutton Land Services, LLC, ____ AD3d ____, 2016 NY Slip Op. 07630 (2d Dept. 2016); Torah v. Dell Equity, LLC, 120 AD3d 1346, 992 N.Y.S.2d 560 (2d Dept. 2014).
It should be noted that plaintiff's Affirmation in Opposition did not establish an issue of fact since the affidavit in support was insufficient; the affiant being a person without personal knowledge. U.S. Bank, Nat. Ass'n v. Noble, ___ AD3d ____, 41 N.Y.S.3d 79,(2d Dept. 2016).
Accordingly, defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted in its entirety. The complaint is dismissed.
_____________________
Genine D. Edwards
S.C.J
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.
