A New York appellate court recently ruled in a case involving Bank of America and the Ragnauth family concerning a disputed mortgage. The court's decision affects the ownership rights of the property in Uniondale, New York, and clarifies the legal standing of mortgages that have not been recorded.
The case, Bank of America, N.A. v. Ragnauth, was decided on August 19, 2026, by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The court affirmed a lower court's decision that granted Bank of America summary judgment on its request for a declaratory judgment regarding the mortgage.
Background
The parties involved in this case are Bank of America, National Association, as the respondent, and Bhagwandai Ragnauth and Joseph Ragnauth, as the appellants. The dispute centers around a mortgage executed by Bhagwandai Ragnauth on September 15, 2006, which was not recorded in the Nassau County Clerk's office.
Bank of America, which effectively acquired the note and mortgage after they were executed, initiated the legal action in July 2018. The bank sought to quiet title to the property and obtain a declaration that the original mortgage was lost and not recorded due to no fault of its own. The case reached the appellate court after the Supreme Court of Nassau County granted summary judgment to Bank of America in April 2024.
The Ruling
The appellate court, which included judges Cheryl E. Chambers, Paul Wooten, Lillian Wan, and Phillip Hom, upheld the lower court's decision. The judges noted that the defendants, Bhagwandai and Joseph Ragnauth, failed to raise a triable issue of fact against Bank of America's claims. The court stated, "The defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to when the plaintiff discovered that the original mortgage was lost, and thus, when the cause of action for declaratory relief accrued."
The ruling confirmed that the defendants' appeal was not academic and that the order was appealable. The court emphasized that the lower court had properly considered the merits of the defendants' opposition, despite their untimely submission. The appellate court ordered the matter to be sent back to the Supreme Court for the entry of a judgment declaring that the original mortgage was lost and not recorded through no fault of the plaintiff.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for property ownership rights in New York, particularly in cases involving unrecorded mortgages. It clarifies that a mortgage can still be considered valid even if it has not been recorded, provided the holder of the mortgage can demonstrate that it was lost without their fault.
The decision may set a precedent for similar cases involving lost or unrecorded mortgages, providing a clearer path for financial institutions to assert their rights. It also underscores the importance of timely filing and proper documentation in real estate transactions.
What's Next
Details regarding potential appeals were not available in the court filing. It remains unclear if the Ragnauths will seek further legal recourse following this ruling.