Nubridge Commercial Lending REO SPV I Inc. v. 51 East 126th Street, LLC
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:22-cv-00434
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In NuBridge v. 51 East 126th Street, Judge Broderick granted the request to pause an earlier order requiring default-judgment proceedings.
The ruling affects NuBridge's obligation to seek default judgment against the City of New York and the New York City Environmental Control Board, and the timing of further proceedings in the foreclosure action involving the appearing defendants.
What happened
NuBridge Commercial Lending REO SPV I Inc. sued 51 East 126th Street, LLC, Vanessa Kate Turner, the City of New York, and the New York City Environmental Control Board in a foreclosure action. The opinion says the borrower and guarantor answered, while the City and Board did not appear.
NuBridge asked the court to hold an earlier order in abeyance, meaning to pause it, rather than immediately seek a default judgment against the City and Board. NuBridge said those defendants had only subordinate lien interests and that it sought no money judgment against them; it intended to foreclose the property as a whole if the case did not settle.
The court granted the request and held the March 9, 2022 order in abeyance. The court also stated that, if the parties settle, NuBridge must discontinue the action against all defendants, including the City and Board. Judge Vernon S. Broderick issued the order.
The detailed version
- Nubridge Commercial Lending REO SPV I Inc. v. 51 East 126th Street, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00434
- Vernon Broderick
- Mar. 17, 2022
Background
NuBridge Commercial Lending REO SPV I Inc. brought a foreclosure action against 51 East 126th Street, LLC, Vanessa Kate Turner, the City of New York, and the New York City Environmental Control Board. The letter submitted to the court states that 51 East 126th Street, LLC was the borrower and Turner was the guarantor. Those two defendants appeared and filed an answer. The City and the Board did not appear.
The court had issued a March 9, 2022 order directing NuBridge to seek a default judgment against the City and the Board. A default judgment is a judgment based on a party's failure to appear or defend.
Request and response
NuBridge asked the court to hold the March 9 order in abeyance, meaning to pause it, while the case proceeded against the appearing defendants. NuBridge stated that the City and Board had only nominal interests as holders of subordinate liens on the property and/or against the borrower. It said the eventual foreclosure judgment would be against all defendants and would terminate subordinate liens. NuBridge also stated that it did not seek a money judgment against the City or Board.
NuBridge further stated that, if it and the appearing defendants settled, it would discontinue the action against all defendants, including the City and Board, and would not seek any further judgment against the City or Board.
Ruling
The court granted the application and held the March 9 order in abeyance. The court stated that, if the parties reach a settlement, NuBridge is directed to discontinue the action against all defendants, including the City and the New York City Environmental Control Board. The order did not decide the underlying foreclosure claims or enter a default judgment against the City or Board.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.