CORNELIA WRIGHT VS. PREMIER BUSINESS MANAGEMENT(L-6000-13, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-3002-15T3
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.Jun 9, 2017Background
- In 2005 Meir Assoulin executed a $750,000 note to JP Morgan secured by a mortgage on a Deal, NJ property; payments ceased in Sept. 2011. JP Morgan recorded the mortgage in 2005.
- JP Morgan served a 14-day notice of default in June 2012 and filed a foreclosure complaint in Feb. 2013; defendants answered and counterclaimed.
- JP Morgan moved for summary judgment and to strike counterclaims; the court granted those motions in Jan. 2014 but the matter did not reach final judgment.
- The case was administratively dismissed for lack of prosecution on Feb. 27, 2015. JP Morgan assigned the mortgage to Wilmington Trust on Jan. 13, 2015 (filed of record Mar. 23, 2015).
- In Apr. 2015 JP Morgan moved to reopen the foreclosure and to substitute Wilmington Trust as plaintiff; the trial court granted reinstatement and substitution (May 2015). Plaintiff later obtained final judgment in foreclosure (Oct. 2015).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether JP Morgan had standing to move to reinstate the foreclosure and substitute Wilmington Trust after assigning the mortgage | JP Morgan had a sufficient personal stake to seek reinstatement and timely moved; Rule 4:34-3 permits continuation by original party pending substitution | JP Morgan lacked standing because it no longer owned/held the mortgage when it moved | Court held JP Morgan had standing to move; substitution was permissible and not an advisory action |
| Whether reinstatement and substitution were inequitable and required further discovery into assignment/chain-of-title | Reinstatement was supported by good cause (servicer issues) and assignment was submitted with the motion; defendants could challenge assignment then | Defendants argued prejudice and requested discovery on the assignment and UCC issues | Court found equitable principles satisfied, no reversible inequity, and record supported substitution without further discovery |
| Whether plaintiff (Wilmington Trust) was required to send a new statutory 30-day notice of intent to foreclose after substitution | JP Morgan originally sent the statutory notice before commencing the foreclosure; substitution does not require a new pre-commencement notice | Defendants argued Wilmington Trust should have sent its own 30-day notice of intent to foreclose | Court held no new notice was required because JP Morgan (the original plaintiff) had complied before commencing the action |
| Whether dismissal for lack of prosecution barred reinstatement | JP Morgan showed good cause for delay (servicer transfer, unresolved certification issues) and moved promptly to reopen | Defendants relied on administrative dismissal and alleged prejudice | Court found good cause under Rule 4:64-8 and reinstated the action |
Key Cases Cited
- Courier-Post Newspaper v. Cty. of Camden, 413 N.J. Super. 372 (App. Div.) (standing reviewed de novo)
- Salorio v. Glaser, 82 N.J. 482 (N.J. 1980) (New Jersey adopts a broad, flexible approach to standing)
- Crescent Park Tenants Ass'n v. Realty Equities Corp. of N.Y., 58 N.J. 98 (N.J. 1971) (favoring just and expeditious determinations over procedural technicalities)
- EnviroFinance Group, LLC v. Envtl. Barrier Co., LLC, 440 N.J. Super. 325 (App. Div.) (financial interest ordinarily suffices for standing)
- Jersey Shore Med. Ctr.-Fitkin Hosp. v. Estate of Baum, 84 N.J. 137 (N.J. 1980) (standing to assert third-party rights requires sufficient personal stake)
- Totowa Sav. & Loan Assoc. v. Crescione, 144 N.J. Super. 347 (App. Div.) (foreclosure is equitable and subject to equitable principles)
- Sovereign Bank, FSB v. Kuelzow, 297 N.J. Super. 187 (App. Div.) (equity requires mortgagor/mortgagee to do equity; "he who seeks equity must do equity")
- Rolnick v. Rolnick, 290 N.J. Super. 35 (App. Div.) (equitable relief denied where petitioner’s bad faith or unconscionable conduct underlies the claim)