So the newest 2309(c) case now holds that this statute is irrelevent

13 Responses

1. How do Courts do that. They’ve done it to me twice. Unless a statute is unconstitutional the Court cannot strke it down. This is the Court playing legislature which in reality becomes the Court stealing citizen’s votes: “the legislature is the embodiment of the people.”

   What a bung hole of a Country.

2. The way I’m reading it, the court is only saying the certificate of conformity can be provided nunc pro tunc. The courts have been holding this in no-fault cases for quite a while. I don’t see this case saying the c of c is not necessary at all.

   1. It cited CPLR 2001. Form defects may be waived, and because they may be waived, it follows that nunc pro tunc relief would allow the document to be admissible in the first instance, sans c of c.

3. Does the RPL have its own version of CPLR rule 2001?
   It seems to me that CPLR rule 2001 governs litigation, but the assignment of a mortgage, its recording, and the standing that therefore results would be covered by the RPL and should not be corrected by reference to a statute designed to save a pleading.
   This is not about the assignment being admissible this is about the assignment being valid at the time the action was commenced, no?

4. The RPL is only applicable in this scenario in the first place because CPLR 2309 says it is, so I’m not sure you can rely on CPLR 2309 while simultaneously disregarding CPLR 2001.

5. I don’t know where this is going but I will say this. Two separate provisions of the CPLR. One cannot be interpreted to cancel the other out.

6. CPLR 2309 deals with oaths and affirmation, and 2309(a)only incorporates the RPL because it allows people authorized to take ACKNOWLEDGMENTS to give the oath.
   The RPL sect 291 et seq. governs the recording of INSTRUMENTS affecting real property,
   RPL 299-a. Allows INSTRUMENTS ACKNOWLEDGED out of the state to be conformed to NY law with the appropriate certificate of conformity much like CPLR 2309(C).
   CPLR 2001 by its language applies only in actions. I do not know if the RPL has a section like CPLR 2001 that allows defects in INSTRUMENTS to be saved nunc pro tunc.
   Maybe ZUPPA is right, maybe this is a BUNG HOLE of a country!

7. The first sign that a nation is going bung hole is the hiring of mercenaries. I give you the end of the Roman Empire and the beginning of the end of the British Empire.

   I give you Kellog Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Haliburton, and Black Water as examples.

   Our own military used to protect itself; construct its own installations and provide its own logistical support.

   Now we hire people to do this.

   Our wars are about profits and much like a shell management company the siphoning of money. In this country’s case we use war to siphon money away from the middleclass to the Dick Cheneys of this once proud nation. That’s why there is one third less of us.

   We live in Gestapo Land.

   Good legal analysis Breeze. Now I actually understand the issues.

8. Damin J. Toell is correct, in that 2309(c) incorporates the RPL to the extent a certificate of conformity is acceptable so long as it is sufficient enough to entitle a deed to be registered. on re-reading my post I did not make that clear.

9. Where’s the Deed?

   Where’s the certificate of conformity?

   “I went back to New York, but my City was gone …”

10. Zuppa you are confusing you’re hatred of yourself with hatred of America. There is only one power on earth that has consistently stopped empires bent on world enslavement – and that is this one. The United States stopped Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, the Soviet Union and we are going to stop Fascist Jihadism next. Perhaps you should introduce the vagaries of No Fault litigation to Quebec since you are so disgusted with this once proud nation – which, to my mind, is still and should still be proudest of the nations on the face of this earth.

11. Square Badge my love for myself is infamously incredible.

    This not the America that beat the Nazis or Imperial Japan. You are seriously confused sir. You must be doing the same drugs as your hero Rush “fat boy” Limbaugh.

    This is the Country of 5 draft deferment Dick “Dick” Cheney.

    This is the Fascist Country that invaded Iraq for corporate profits and then gave it to Iran — the real enemy.

    BTW Dick “the dick” Cheney got around the ban on doing business with Iran by forming an offshore subsidiary of Haliburton called Kellog Brown and Root. That’s the company that supplied our troops in Iraq feces laden water.

    Are you suggesting that I move to Canada. I will suggest what I always suggest. You or any surrogate you want — beat me in a fight; legal in a gym in N.J. and I will leave the country and go to Canada.

    I so savor beating you or some other trailer park, skoal spitting, cousin fornicating right wing jack ass to a pulp.

12. Hey Zuppa, guess what? People made money off of World War II, and World War I and the Spanish-American War and every war Americans have ever been involved in. War requires supplies, and supplies have to be made and paid for, and no one makes supplies at a loss. Process that.

    Dick Cheney applied for and received 5 draft deferments, yes. But your boy Bill Clinton got his buddy, Senator Fulbright, to use his influence to exempt him from the draft. I’d like you to whine about that, please.

    Do you have any facts to support the claim that the US invaded Iraq for corporate profit, or is that just a leftist talking point you repeat like an idiot parrot?

    BTW, Kellogg Brown and Root has been in existence since approximately 1989. It wasn’t formed by Cheney. Kellogg and Brown and Root have each been in existence since the early 20th Century. Try to verify your leftist nonsense before you spout it.

    Will beating you in a fight cause you to move to Canada like all the Hollywood lefties promised to move if Bush got elected or reelected?

    Another internet tough guy. Wow. That’s new.