Eastern Savings Bank v. Estate of Kirk
821 F. Supp. 2d 543
E.D.N.Y2011Background
- Eastern Savings Bank filed a federal diversity foreclosure action on a mortgage encumbering property in Southampton, NY.
- The mortgage and note were executed by Alexis Kirk on February 26, 2008 and recorded March 26, 2008.
- Kirk died on May 17, 2010, and his will was offered for probate in the Surrogate’s Court on May 21, 2010.
- Preliminary Letters Testamentary were issued June 7, 2010, naming Lisa Kirk and Alexia Kirk Andrus as co-executors.
- Plaintiff alleges default on the note and mortgage from April 2010 onward and filed this action October 8, 2010 seeking foreclosure under NY RPAPL.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remand or transfer authority | Bank contends no remand power since originally filed in federal court. | Defendants seek remand to Surrogate’s Court under § 1447(c). | Motion to remand denied; no remand power because action commenced in federal court. |
| Abstention under Colorado River | State proceedings could resolve the dispute; abstention warranted. | abstention preferable to avoid duplicative litigation. | Abstention denied; stay not appropriate; federal jurisdiction retained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (U.S. 1976) (establishes the exceptional, narrow basis for abstention)
- Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Const. Corp., 460 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1983) (framework for determining abstention factors)
- Salomon v. Burr Manor Estates, Inc., 635 F. Supp. 2d 196 (E.D.N.Y. 2009) (enumerates abstention factors and their weights)
- Dittmer v. Cnty. of Suffolk, 146 F.3d 113 (2d Cir. 1998) (parallel proceedings and abstention considerations)
- Schiffman v. Epstein, 2009 WL 1787760 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (removal/remand limitations discussed)
- Hatheril v. Michael, 1993 WL 385754 (S.D.N.Y. 1993) (lack of authority to remove federal case to state court)
- Keane v. Mixter, 202 Misc. 1025, 111 N.Y.S.2d 656 (N.Y. Misc. 1952) (Surrogate’s Court authority and lack of foreclosure judgment power discussed)
