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.
8 New York opinions name it 3 courts 2018–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Shah v. Mitragreen2 sentences2026"On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b), the court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974 [internal quotation marks omitted]). 2025In deciding a motion to dismiss defenses, the court should apply the same standard as it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true ( Shah , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d 912, 913 [2d Dept 2018]). | 5 | 5 |
Bank of New York v. Penalvergreen2 sentences2019"On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b), the court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true" ( Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d at 913; see Bank of N.Y. v Penalver , 125 AD3d at 797 ; Bank of Am., N.A. v 414 Midland Ave. 2018On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b), the court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true ( see Bank of N.Y. v Penalver, 125 AD3d at 797 ; Bank of Am., N.A. v 414 Midland Ave. | 1 | 2 |
Emigrant Bank v. Kaufmangreen2 sentences2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d at 913). "'A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by [*2]demonstrating that, when the action was commenced, it was either the holder or assignee of the underlying note'" ( Emigrant Bank v Kaufman , 223 AD3d 650 , 652, quoting U.S. Bank N.A. v Rozo-Castellanos , 201 AD3d 995, 998 ; see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor , 25 NY3d 355, 360-361 ). "'Either a w 2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d at 913). "'A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by [*2]demonstrating that, when the action was commenced, it was either the holder or assignee of the underlying note'" ( Emigrant Bank v Kaufman , 223 AD3d 650 , 652, quoting U.S. Bank N.A. v Rozo-Castellanos , 201 AD3d 995, 998 ; see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor , 25 NY3d 355, 360-361 ). "'Either a w | 1 | 1 |
Aurora Loan Services v. Monique Taylorgreen1 sentence2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d at 913). "'A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by [*2]demonstrating that, when the action was commenced, it was either the holder or assignee of the underlying note'" ( Emigrant Bank v Kaufman , 223 AD3d 650 , 652, quoting U.S. Bank N.A. v Rozo-Castellanos , 201 AD3d 995, 998 ; see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor , 25 NY3d 355, 360-361 ). "'Either a w | 1 | 1 |
Wells Fargo Bank, NA v. Moussagreen1 sentence2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d at 913). "'A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by [*2]demonstrating that, when the action was commenced, it was either the holder or assignee of the underlying note'" ( Emigrant Bank v Kaufman , 223 AD3d 650 , 652, quoting U.S. Bank N.A. v Rozo-Castellanos , 201 AD3d 995, 998 ; see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor , 25 NY3d 355, 360-361 ). "'Either a w | 1 | 1 |
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Rozo-Castellanosgreen2 sentences2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d at 913). "'A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by [*2]demonstrating that, when the action was commenced, it was either the holder or assignee of the underlying note'" ( Emigrant Bank v Kaufman , 223 AD3d 650 , 652, quoting U.S. Bank N.A. v Rozo-Castellanos , 201 AD3d 995, 998 ; see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor , 25 NY3d 355, 360-361 ). "'Either a w 2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d at 913). "'A plaintiff establishes its standing in a mortgage foreclosure action by [*2]demonstrating that, when the action was commenced, it was either the holder or assignee of the underlying note'" ( Emigrant Bank v Kaufman , 223 AD3d 650 , 652, quoting U.S. Bank N.A. v Rozo-Castellanos , 201 AD3d 995, 998 ; see Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v Taylor , 25 NY3d 355, 360-361 ). "'Either a w | 1 | 1 |
Federici v. Metropolis Night Club, Inc.green2 sentences2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank N.A. , 160 AD2d at 913; Federici v Metropolis Night Club, Inc., 48 AD3d 741, 743 [2d Dept 2008]). 2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank N.A. , 160 AD2d at 913; Federici v Metropolis Night Club, Inc., 48 AD3d 741, 743 [2d Dept 2008]). | 1 | 1 |
Mintz v. Grossmangreen2 sentences2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank N.A. , 160 AD2d at 913; Federici v Metropolis Night Club, Inc., 48 AD3d 741, 743 [2d Dept 2008]). 2025"Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Shah , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank N.A. , 160 AD2d at 913; Federici v Metropolis Night Club, Inc., 48 AD3d 741, 743 [2d Dept 2008]). | 1 | 1 |
Granite State Insurance v. Transatlantic Reinsurance Co.green2 sentences2024Co., 132 AD3d at 481 [citation omitted].) However, "[u]nlike subdivision (a), which enumerates grounds on which a cause of action may be dismissed, there are no listed grounds on which a defense may be attacked." (Siegel, NY Practice§ 269 [6th ed.].) "Any defense may be attacked on any ground, and there 656376/2020 ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE vs. 2024Co. v Transatlantic Reinsurance Co., 132 AD3d 479, 481 [1st Dept 2015] [citation omitted]; see also Shah v Mitra, 171 AD3d 971 , 974 [2d Dept 2019] ["[Movant] bears the burden of demonstrating that the affirmative defenses are without merit as a matter of law because they either do not apply under the factual circumstances of [the] case, or fail to state a defense."] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted].) "[T]he court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true." (I | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bank of America, N.A. v. 414 Midland Avenue Associates, LLC
green
2 sentences2025Assoc., LLC , 78 AD3d 746, 748 ). "'On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b), the court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true'" ( id. , quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d 912 , 913). "'Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed'" ( id. ). 2025"On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b), the court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true" ( id. [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Rios , 160 AD3d 912 , 913). | 4 | 2018–2025 |
Blachowicz v. City of New York
green
1 sentence2026"If there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed" ( Blachowicz v City of New York , 241 AD3d 1513 , 1516 [internal quotation marks omitted]). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Matter of Arcamone-Makinano v. Perlmutter
green
1 sentence2025Initially, contrary to the Supreme Court's determination, the defendant was not barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel from asserting affirmative defenses and counterclaims regarding the subject parking spaces, which was not an issue that was raised in the parties' prior nonpayment proceeding ( see Calixte v City of New York , 207 AD3d 431, 431 ; Matter of Arcamone-Makinano v Perlmutter , 196 AD3d 479, 480 ). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Calixte v. City of New York
green
1 sentence2025Initially, contrary to the Supreme Court's determination, the defendant was not barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel from asserting affirmative defenses and counterclaims regarding the subject parking spaces, which was not an issue that was raised in the parties' prior nonpayment proceeding ( see Calixte v City of New York , 207 AD3d 431, 431 ; Matter of Arcamone-Makinano v Perlmutter , 196 AD3d 479, 480 ). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Miller v. Miller
green
2 sentences2020Assoc., LLC , 78 AD3d 746, 748 ). " On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b), the court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true'" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., v Rios , 160 AD2d 912, 913 ). " Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed'" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., v Rios , 160 AD2d at 913 ). 2020Assoc., LLC , 78 AD3d 746, 748 ). " On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b), the court should apply the same standard it applies to a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and the factual assertions of the defense will be accepted as true'" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., v Rios , 160 AD2d 912, 913 ). " Moreover, if there is any doubt as to the availability of a defense, it should not be dismissed'" ( Shah v Mitra , 171 AD3d at 974, quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., v Rios , 160 AD2d at 913 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Butler v. Catinella
green
1 sentence2020With respect to the defendant's first affirmative defense, alleging failure to state a cause of action, no motion lies under CPLR 3211(b) to strike this affirmative defense as this amounts to an endeavor by the plaintiff to test the sufficiency of his or own claim ( see Jacob Marion, LLC v Jones , 168 AD3d 1043 , 1044; Butler v Catinella , 58 AD3d 145, 150-151 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |