Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
22 New York opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2022 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
21st Mortgage Corp. v. Adamesgreen2 sentences2022Corp. v Adames , 153 AD3d 474, 475 ; see Freedom Mtge. 2022Corp. v Adames , 153 AD3d 474, 475 ; see Freedom Mtge. | 1 | 17 |
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Burkegreen1 sentence2017Co. v Mares, 135 AD3d 1121 , 1122-1123 [2016]; see generally Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Burke, 94 AD3d at 982-983 ). | 1 | 1 |
EMC Mortgage Corp. v. Patellagreen1 sentence2016Corp. v Patella, 279 AD2d 604, 605-606 [2d Dept 2001]). “[Although a lender may revoke its election to accelerate all sums due under an optional acceleration clause . . . provided . . . there is no change in the borrower’s position in reliance thereon” (Federal Natl. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. King
green
2 sentences2022However, "[a] 'letter discussing acceleration as a possible future event, . . . does not constitute an exercise of the mortgage's optional acceleration clause'" ( HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v King , 193 AD3d at 695 , quoting 21st Mtge. 2022However, "[a] 'letter discussing acceleration as a possible future event, . . . does not constitute an exercise of the mortgage's optional acceleration clause'" ( id. at 695 , quoting 21st Mtge. | 2 | 2022–2022 |
Neefeldt v. Tompkinson
green
2 sentences2019The "due on sale" clause, which granted the defendant an option to accelerate the debt [*3]secured by the mortgage in the event of a sale of the property, was "an optional acceleration clause which had to be exercised prior to maturity" ( Notarnicola v Lafayette Farms , 288 AD2d 198, 199 ). 2019Since the debt matured in April 2008, the "due on sale" clause had already become irrelevant and without effect well before the property was sold to the Town ( see id. at 199 ). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Goldman Sachs Mortgage Co. v. Mares
green
1 sentence2017Co. v Mares, 135 AD3d 1121 , 1122-1123 [2016]; see generally Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Burke, 94 AD3d at 982-983 ). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Golden v. Ramapo Improvement Corp.
green
1 sentence1994Contrary to Metmor’s contention, although a lender may revoke its election to accelerate all sums due under an optional acceleration clause in a mortgage provided that there is no change in the borrower’s position in reliance thereon (see, Golden v Ramapo Improvement Corp., 78 AD2d 648, 650 ), the record is barren of any affirmative act of revocation occurring within the six-year Statute of Limitations period subsequent to the service of the complaint in the prior foreclosure action, wherein the holder of the mortgage notified the borrowers of its election to accelerate (see, Albertina Realty | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Albertina Realty Co. v. Rosbro Realty Corp.
green
1 sentence1994Contrary to Metmor’s contention, although a lender may revoke its election to accelerate all sums due under an optional acceleration clause in a mortgage provided that there is no change in the borrower’s position in reliance thereon (see, Golden v Ramapo Improvement Corp., 78 AD2d 648, 650 ), the record is barren of any affirmative act of revocation occurring within the six-year Statute of Limitations period subsequent to the service of the complaint in the prior foreclosure action, wherein the holder of the mortgage notified the borrowers of its election to accelerate (see, Albertina Realty | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Khoury v. Alger
green
1 sentence1994Consequently, separate causes of action for each installment accrued, and the Statute of Limitations began to run, on the date each installment became due (see, Khoury v Alger, 174 AD2d 918 ; Utica Mut. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.