Blog

Why follow the law?March 20, 2015

HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Simmons, 2015 NY Slip Op 01609 (2d Dept. 2015)

“Since Justice Arthur Schack continues to ignore this Court’s precedent, as articulated in Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v Mastropaolo (42 AD3d 239), holding that the defense of lack of standing is waived if not raised by the defendant in an answer or pre-answer motion to dismiss (see Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Islar, 122 AD3d 566; HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Taher, 104 AD3d at 817; U.S. Bank, N.A. v Emmanuel, 83 AD3d at 1048-1049; cf. Bank of N.Y. v Cepeda, 120 AD3d 451, 452; Bank of N.Y. v Mulligan, 119 AD3d 716, 716; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Gioia, 114 AD3d at 767), we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings on the complaint before a different Justice.”

2 Responses

  1. The Hater says:

    Oh to…die for. I love this Judge. He is a proponent of the truth. There is no law. Just street justice. And the sooner we realize that the better.

    Forget your computers and gadgets. Better buy some guns and ammunition. A good sword like that great looking African American Woman in “The Walking Dead.”

    Let’s start shooting and hacking randomly at anyone and everyone.

  2. Rookie says:

    Now we need the same result and the same decision by the Appellae Division to the Appellate Term

Leave a Reply