Majority
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lewis, J.), dated August 18, 2015, which denied its motion to confirm the report of a referee and for leave to enter a judgment of foreclosure and sale.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to apply the doctrine of law of the case and in reconsidering the issue of whether RPAPL 1304 was applicable to the loan in this case (see National Mtge. Consultants v
Finally, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion in light of the outstanding issues of fact as to whether RPAPL 1304 was applicable to the loan in this case and, if RPAPL 1304 notice was required, whether it was properly and timely sent (see JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v Kutch, 142 AD3d 536 , 537 [2016]).
Balkin, J.P., Dickerson, Cohen and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- National Mortgage Consultants v. Elizaitis 23 AD3d 630 at 630 p. 756
- People v. Evans 94 NY2d 499 at 503 p. 756
- Mazur Bros. Realty, LLC v. State 117 AD3d 949 at 952 p. 756
- Citimortgage, Inc. v. Espinal 134 AD3d 876 at 879-880 p. 756
- Gluck v. New York City Transit Authority 118 AD3d 667 at 668 p. 756
- JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Kutch 142 AD3d 536 at 537 p. 756