Court affirms foreclosure judgment in Frankel v. 59 Sands Point

The New York Appellate Division has ruled in favor of Ronald Frankel in a foreclosure case involving 59 Sands Point, LLC and Hudson City Savings Bank. The court's decision, made on June 3, 2026, confirms the lower court's judgment to foreclose on properties tied to the defendants. This ruling affects the defendants and clarifies the legal process surrounding mortgage foreclosures in New York.

The case, Frankel v. 59 Sands Point, LLC, was filed under docket number 2016-11897. It centers around a dispute where Frankel sought to foreclose on mortgages associated with the defendants. The ruling is significant as it underscores the court's authority to grant summary judgment in foreclosure actions, thereby expediting the process for lenders seeking to recover debts secured by real property.

Background

The parties involved in this case include Ronald Frankel, the plaintiff, and several defendants, including Hudson City Savings Bank, 59 Sands Point, LLC, and individuals Eve Strausman Winston and Jonathan Winston. The dispute arose when Frankel initiated legal action to foreclose on mortgages that were allegedly in default.

The case reached the Appellate Division after multiple rulings in lower courts. Initially, the Supreme Court of Nassau County granted Frankel's motion for summary judgment against Hudson City Savings Bank and the Winstons, dismissing their affirmative defenses. The Winstons and Hudson City Savings Bank subsequently appealed the decision, seeking to overturn the ruling that favored Frankel.

The Ruling

The Appellate Division upheld the lower court's decisions, affirming the order and judgment of foreclosure and sale. The court ruled that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for foreclosure by providing the necessary documentation, including the mortgage, the unpaid note, and evidence of default.

The court stated, "The Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against Hudson and the Winstons and dismissing those defendants' affirmative defenses and for an order of reference."

Judges Mark C. Dillon, Barry E. Warhit, Carl J. Landicino, and Phillip Hom concurred in the decision. The court also noted that the defendants failed to raise any triable issues of fact that would warrant a different outcome.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for future mortgage foreclosure cases in New York. It reinforces the standard that plaintiffs in foreclosure actions must meet to secure a summary judgment. The court's decision clarifies that as long as the plaintiff provides adequate proof of the mortgage, the unpaid note, and evidence of default, the court may grant summary judgment.

The ruling also affects the defendants involved, particularly Hudson City Savings Bank and the Winstons, as they must now comply with the foreclosure order. This case may set a precedent for how similar foreclosure cases are handled in the future, particularly in regards to the defenses available to defendants in such actions.

What's Next

The defendants have the option to appeal this ruling to a higher court, but details on any pending appeals were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case could influence ongoing and future foreclosure disputes in New York.