In this mortgage foreclosure action, the Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department, in accordance with M&H’s arguments on appeal, struck 79 pages of the record on appeal prepared by the bank, as well as the references to that material in its Appellant’s Brief, as both the brief and record contained matter that was dehors the record.
|Aurora Loan Services v Bandhu|
|Motion No: 2015-11603|
|Slip Opinion No: 2017 NY Slip Op 76113(U)|
|Decided on June 7, 2017|
|Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision|
|Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.|
|This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports.|
Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.
Aurora Loan Services, appellant,
v Vishna Bandhu, respondent, DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
et al., defendants.
(Index No. 27189/09)
Motion by the respondent to strike stated portions of the record and the appellant’s brief on an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 4, 2014, on the ground that they contain or refer to matter dehors the record, and to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief. Cross motion by the appellant to amend the certification pursuant to CPLR 2105 to include certain material nunc pro tunc.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the cross motion, and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that pages 11 through 90 of the record as well as references to that material in the table of contents of the record and the appellant’s brief are stricken, and on or before July 7, 2017, the appellant shall remove the stricken material from the copies of the record filed with the Clerk of the Court, or serve and file a replacement record that does not contain the stricken material, and a replacement brief that does not refer to the stricken material; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent’s time to serve and file a brief is enlarged until August 7, 2017, and the respondent’s brief shall be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that the cross motion is denied.
DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, HINDS-RADIX and LASALLE, JJ., concur.
Clerk of the Court