The New York Law Journal by Jeff Storey
A Brooklyn judge who has become known for his sharply worded opinions criticizing lenders seeking foreclosure and their attorneys (NYLJ, Dec. 28) has himself been faulted by an appeals court for adopting a drastic remedy to what the judge regarded as a tardy response to his demand for information. Supreme Court Justice Arthur M. Schack became concerned that a lender's counsel, Steven J. Baum, P.C., was representing both the plaintiff in the case, the assignee of the mortgage, and the defendant Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS), the assignor. In an order dated Feb. 2, 2009, he denied a motion for direct service but said the attorneys could move to renew within 60 days providing that the Baum firm submitted an affirmation that it had made full disclosure of any potential conflicts and that the plaintiff consented to the situation. The firm responded with an affirmation that it was not representing both parties in this case, but Justice Schack decided the assurances came too late. Since the affirmation was submitted 123 days after his 60-day deadline, he dismissed the foreclosure complaint "with prejudice" and canceled a notice of pendency. But the Appellate Division, Second Department, ruled last week in U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Kelvy Guichardo, 19086/08, that only "extraordinary circumstances" would justify such a drastic action, and "a single delay in submitting the affirmation" by the Baum firm did not qualify. "There was no pattern of willful noncompliance with court orders on part of the plaintiff and the Supreme Court gave no warning" that a failure to submit the affirmation within 60 days would result in the action Justice Schack took, the unanimous panel said in an unsigned opinion reversing his decision. Joining the decision were Justices William F. Mastro, Sandra L. Sgroi, Jeffrey A. Cohen and L. Priscilla Hall.
------ RELATED STORIES:
Posts
8 comments:
What is also interesting about this, is this Judge was actually legally and constitutionally elected to his position.
Unlike the majority of the judges in the state.
Maybe those other judges are jealous?
Every crooked NY lawyer knows that the Appellate Division is the first refuge for scoundrels.
are we talking about the same case?
http://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2009/2009-50151.html
the 2nd Dept Appellate Cesspool on Monroe St. is "For Rent" one can only guess what this cost the banks and their whore lawyers, the 1st Dept gets bigger payoffs by the way
I applaud this judge. He believes in the law and is a man of conviction. I trust he realizes that the spineless OCA hacks/wimps he answers to have been plotting to fry his ass.
this is Protection of the Protection Racket.
Any regular lawyer who was that many days late in submitting anything would be tarred and feathered by the App Divs and Standards folks.
Steve Baum's firm had perfected the art of the taking of property to a full systematic venture.
His firm stole a lovely property and the equity from a Registered Nurse in upstate NY Columbia County with local Judges Czajka and visiting Judge Christian Hummel at the helm.
time to undo the ugly mess that new york courts represent top to bottom, been time for long time.
TIME TO START SHOOTING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What is also interesting about this, is this Judge was actually legally and constitutionally elected to his position. Unlike the majority of the judges in the state. Maybe those other judges are jealous?
Post a Comment