FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION VS. JUDITH MESSINEO(F-7411-13, WARREN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-0979-15T3

Background

In July 2004 Judith Messineo executed a $93,000 note and mortgage; the note was endorsed in blank and the mortgage was recorded and later assigned to Federal National Mortgage Association (Federal National).
Messineo defaulted on the loan in December 2010; Seterus (servicer) sent a Notice of Intention to Foreclose in December 2012 identifying Federal National as owner and holder.
Federal National filed foreclosure in March 2013; Messineo, proceeding pro se, answered denying execution and asserted 21 affirmative defenses.
Discovery disputes arose: Messineo failed to respond to interrogatories and requests for production and moved for a 90‑day extension citing age, health, and Hurricane Sandy damage; Federal National opposed and moved for summary judgment.
Messineo did not appear at the September 12, 2013 return date; the trial court denied the discovery extension, granted Federal National summary judgment, struck Messineo’s answer and affirmative defenses, and later entered a final foreclosure judgment (Aug. 20, 2015).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying Messineo more time for discovery	Denial appropriate because Messineo failed to show specificity about what discovery would produce or why more time would supply elements of a defense	Needed time due to pro se status, age, medication, and Hurricane Sandy damage to obtain documents	No abuse of discretion; Messineo failed to demonstrate with particularity that discovery would supply defense elements
Whether Federal National had standing to foreclose	Federal National held the mortgage (assignment recorded pre‑complaint) and had physical possession of the endorsed note	Messineo challenged standing and denied executing the note and mortgage	Federal National had standing: assignment predated complaint and endorsed note in blank with possession sufficed
Whether genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment	Produced Seterus certification, recorded mortgage, NOI, proof of default and assignment	Denied execution of note/mortgage; asserted various affirmative defenses and asserted eligibility for loan modification	No genuine dispute: records and certification established validity of mortgage, default, and right to foreclose; affirmative defenses insufficiently supported
Whether final judgment of foreclosure was proper after answer/defenses were stricken	After striking pleadings, action became uncontested; defendant did not contest amount due	Argued prior rulings erroneous and raised same defenses	Final judgment proper under uncontested foreclosure rules; no challenge to amount due was raised

Key Cases Cited

State in Interest of A.B. v. N.J. Dep't of Children & Families, 219 N.J. 542 (N.J. 2014) (standard of review for discovery rulings)
Pomerantz Paper Corp. v. New Cmty. Corp., 207 N.J. 344 (N.J. 2011) (deference to trial court discovery determinations)
Flagg v. Essex Cty. Prosecutor, 171 N.J. 561 (N.J. 2002) (definition of abuse of discretion)
W.J.A. v. D.A., 210 N.J. 229 (N.J. 2012) (summary judgment standard—de novo review)
Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (N.J. 1995) (summary judgment burdens and standards)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (weight of evidence standard for summary judgment)
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. v. Mitchell, 422 N.J. Super. 214 (App. Div. 2011) (standing requires ownership or control of debt)
Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Angeles, 428 N.J. Super. 315 (App. Div. 2012) (possession of endorsed note or assignment of mortgage predating complaint confers standing)
Great Falls Bank v. Pardo, 263 N.J. Super. 388 (Ch. Div. 1993) (material issues in foreclosure limited to mortgage validity, indebtedness amount, and mortgagee’s right)
Nieder v. Royal Indemn. Ins. Co., 62 N.J. 229 (N.J. 1973) (appellate courts generally do not consider issues not raised below)