Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Roy Hall

Holding The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to grant the plaintiff an extension of time to serve the summons and complaint under CPLR 306-b, finding that the extension was justified in the interest of justice. The court also rejected the defendant’s argument for dismissal based on failure to comply with RPAPL 1303, as the statute does not apply to non-owner-occupied properties.

The court’s words

Pursuant to CPLR 306-b, a court may, in the exercise of discretion, grant an extension of time within which to effect service for good cause shown or in the interest of justice

2026 NY Slip Op 05932, at the official text

the plaintiff demonstrated, among other things, that the action was timely commenced, that service was timely attempted and was believed by the plaintiff to have been made within 120 days

2026 NY Slip Op 05932, at the official text

RPAPL 1303 only requires that an RPAPL 1303 notice be given to a mortgagor if the action relates to an owner-occupied one-to-four family dwelling

2026 NY Slip Op 05932, at the official text

the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff's motion in the interest of justice, and properly determined that dismissal of complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant pursuant to CPLR 306-b and 3211(a)(8) on the ground of the plaintiff's failure to serve the defendant with the summons and complaint was not warranted

2026 NY Slip Op 05932, at the official text