The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York recently ruled in a significant mortgage foreclosure case, U.S. Bank, NA v. Lang, affecting how similar cases may be handled in the future. The court's decision, issued on October 14, 2026, upheld a lower court's ruling that dismissed U.S. Bank's foreclosure complaint against Anna Porczak. This ruling is crucial for homeowners facing foreclosure, as it clarifies the application of the statute of limitations in such cases.
The case began when U.S. Bank, the plaintiff, sought to foreclose on a mortgage held by Porczak, among others. The dispute arose from a previous foreclosure action initiated by U.S. Bank's predecessor in 2010, which was dismissed as abandoned in 2017. The current ruling emphasizes the importance of timely legal action in foreclosure cases and the implications of recent legislative changes.
U.S. Bank, NA, the appellant in this case, is a well-known financial institution involved in various banking and mortgage services. Anna Porczak, the respondent, is a homeowner in Ridgewood, New York, who became embroiled in the foreclosure dispute after the bank's predecessor initiated the 2010 action. The case reached the Appellate Division after Porczak successfully moved for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint against her, citing a change in the law.
The dispute escalated through the courts after U.S. Bank's predecessor filed a foreclosure action in 2010. In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled that the initial action was abandoned, which led to the dismissal of the case. U.S. Bank then filed a new foreclosure action in 2018, but Porczak countered with her own motion for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint. Initially, this motion was denied in November 2022, but Porczak later sought to renew her motion based on the enactment of the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) in December 2022.
The court ruled in favor of Porczak, stating, "the statute of limitations began to run on the entire debt in 2010, when the plaintiff's predecessor in interest commenced the 2010 action, and that this action, which was commenced more than six years later, was time-barred." The judges involved in the ruling included Angela G. Iannacci, Deborah A. Dowling, Carl J. Landicino, and Laurence L. Love.
This ruling has significant implications for future foreclosure cases. It clarifies that once a mortgage debt is accelerated, the statute of limitations begins to run on the entire debt. The court confirmed that the new FAPA law changes how the six-month savings provision previously applied under CPLR 205(a). The court noted that under the new CPLR 205-a, a plaintiff cannot benefit from this provision if the prior action was dismissed as abandoned.
The decision also highlighted that U.S. Bank's arguments regarding the retroactive application of FAPA were without merit. The court stated, "the plaintiff's contentions that FAPA does not apply retroactively or that retroactive application of FAPA is unconstitutional are without merit." This ruling sets a precedent for how courts may interpret the statute of limitations in future foreclosure actions.
Going forward, this ruling affects not only U.S. Bank and Porczak but also other homeowners facing similar foreclosure actions. It underscores the importance of timely legal action and the necessity for plaintiffs to be aware of changes in the law that may impact their cases. Homeowners can take comfort in knowing that the courts are upholding protections against prolonged foreclosure actions.
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether U.S. Bank plans to appeal this decision or if there are related cases pending. However, the ruling serves as a reminder for financial institutions and homeowners alike to stay informed about legal changes that could affect foreclosure proceedings.