Preview:

Supreme Court, Nassau County, July 31, 2008
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Ezratty, Ezratty & Levine, LLP, Mineola (Dan M. Blumenthal of counsel), for Adam Abdelhamid, proposed intervenor. Law Offices of Alan H. Weinreb, PLLC, Syosset, for plaintiff. Michael Vacchio, defendant pro se. Nick Koulmanis, defendant pro se. Scieila Ferrari, defendant pro se.
{**21 Misc 3d at 334} {**21 Misc 3d at 334} OPINION OF THE COURT
Daniel R. Palmieri, J.
In this mortgage foreclosure action, that prong of the motion of nonparty Adam Abdelhamid to intervene is denied, and that prong of the motion which is to vacate as to him the order of possession, dated March 31, 2008, previously issued herein is granted and said order is vacated as to Adam Abdelhamid. All other requests for relief are denied.
Plaintiff mortgagee foreclosed on its mortgage, obtained a judgment of foreclosure and thereafter purchased the mortgaged premises which are known as 2961 Morgan Drive, Wantagh, New York. This action was commenced in 2006 and proposed intervenor became a tenant at the mortgaged premises pursuant to a one-year lease after the filing of a lis pendens and the commencement of this action. Proposed intervenor contends{**21 Misc 3d at 335}{**21 Misc 3d at 335} that he is not a defendant, is not bound by the lis pendens, his tenancy may not be affected by the foreclosure, and he may not be evicted pursuant to the terms of this court's prior order.
The purpose of a notice of pendency, which is authorized by CPLR 6501, is to prevent the acquisition of an interest in the subject matter of the suit, to the prejudice of the plaintiff, because otherwise there would be no end to any suit, the justice of the court would be evaded and great hardship to the suitor would be necessarily introduced (Cayuga Indian Nation of N.Y. v Fox, 544 F Supp 542, 547-548 [ND NY 1982]). Where, as is here, a motion to intervene is made after judgment of foreclosure and after a sale, intervention is not available (Lakeville Mfg. Co. v Herman Homes, [*2]14 AD2d 551 [2d Dept 1961]; La Marche v Rosenblum, 50 AD2d 636 [3d Dept 1975]).
Proposed intervenor contends that his lease is for one year, is not a conveyance which is entitled to recordation under the recording acts (Real Property Law

Download 2008_28307.pdf

New York Law