New York Law Watch
Mortgage Foreclosure
Mortgage enforcement is the subject of this collection, including Law Watch decisions on acceleration, standing, limitations periods and the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act.
For Mortgage Foreclosure, Law Watch lists 58 indexable decisions dated February 19, 2026 to November 4, 2026 across 11 decision weeks.
63 decision records: 58 meet the substance floor; 5 records are held from search listings.
The records below come from 4 courts and include both primary and secondary area classifications.
Browse by year
Recent decisions
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v Kogan2026 NY Slip Op 06485
The court held that the plaintiff was estopped from arguing that the mortgage debt was not validly accelerated by a prior 2007 action because that action was dismissed for failure to comply with a court order, not for lack of standing. Consequently, the 2015 foreclosure action was time-barred under the six-year statute of limitations.
- U.S. Bank N.A. v Walker2026 NY Slip Op 06482
The plaintiff failed to establish standing or strict compliance with RPAPL 1304, requiring the denial of its motion for summary judgment. However, the defendants failed to meet their burden on cross-motion to dismiss the complaint based on those same grounds.
- U.S. Bank N.A. v Rahman2026 NY Slip Op 06481
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action as time-barred because the statute of limitations began running when the plaintiff accelerated the debt in a prior action. The court held that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act prohibits a noteholder from unilaterally revoking a prior election to accelerate the debt.
- U.S. Bank N.A. v Baidoo2026 NY Slip Op 06480
The appellate court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the summary judgment and foreclosure judgment because she failed to offer a reasonable excuse for her default in opposing the plaintiff’s motions. Consequently, the defendant was precluded from asserting defenses based on lack of standing or failure to comply with RPAPL 1304.
- MTGLQ Investors, L.P. v Mazza2026 NY Slip Op 06430
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action as time-barred because the debt was accelerated by a prior action that was dismissed for neglect, thereby precluding the plaintiff from using the savings provision of CPLR 205-a under the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act. The court further held that the retroactive application of FAPA to this action was constitutional and did not violate due process or contract clauses.
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee, v Helena Laurino, Also Known as Helena T. Laurino, Appellant, et al., Defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 06371
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment of foreclosure and sale, finding no abuse of discretion in the lower court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment due to insufficient proof of a reasonable excuse. The court further upheld the confirmation of the referee’s report, rejecting the defendant’s challenges to the evidence and calculations as unsupported by admissible record evidence.
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, etc., respondent, v Eric Leder, etc., appellant, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 06349
The inclusion of relevant bankruptcy rights information in the same envelope as the RPAPL 1304 notice did not violate the separate envelope requirement. Additionally, the loan servicer was properly authorized to send the required notices under a limited power of attorney.
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Boyd2026 NY Slip Op 06347
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the foreclosure judgment, holding that the defendant waived the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by actively litigating the action without first asserting an objection. Additionally, the prior order denying the motion to dismiss was the law of the case regarding the jurisdictional arguments.