The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York has reversed a foreclosure judgment against Kieran McFarlane, a defendant in a mortgage foreclosure case brought by the Bank of New York Mellon Trust, N.A. This decision, made on November 12, 2026, is significant as it underscores the importance of proper service of process in legal proceedings. The court's ruling means that McFarlane will have another chance to contest the foreclosure.

The case originated in February 2011 when the plaintiff's predecessor filed a lawsuit against McFarlane and others to foreclose on a mortgage for a property located in Brooklyn. McFarlane did not respond to the initial complaint, leading to a default judgment against him in 2017. However, McFarlane later sought to challenge this default judgment, arguing that he had not been properly served with the court documents.

The dispute centers around whether McFarlane was adequately notified of the legal action against him. According to the court documents, the plaintiff claimed to have served McFarlane at an address that was not his actual residence. McFarlane asserted that he lived at the property in question and did not receive the summons and complaint. This discrepancy led to the appeal, as McFarlane argued that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him due to improper service.

The Appellate Division's ruling, which reversed the earlier foreclosure judgment, emphasized the necessity for strict compliance with service procedures. The judges noted, "Service of process upon a natural person must be made in strict compliance with the statutory methods of service set forth in CPLR 308. The failure to serve process in an action leaves the court without personal jurisdiction over the defendant." The court found that McFarlane had sufficiently rebutted the presumption of proper service established by the plaintiff's affidavits, thus necessitating a hearing to determine the validity of the service.

Additionally, the court criticized the process by which the referee's report was confirmed, stating that the report was based on unproduced records and was not adequately supported by the evidence. The judges remarked, "A referee's report with computations that are based on the review of unidentified and unproduced business records which constitute inadmissible hearsay is not substantially supported by the record." This further justified the need for a new hearing on the matter.

The ruling has significant implications for McFarlane and potentially for others in similar situations. It highlights the critical nature of proper legal procedures in foreclosure cases and reinforces the rights of defendants to contest judgments that may have been improperly granted. The court's decision also serves as a reminder to lenders and their representatives to ensure they follow the correct legal protocols when initiating foreclosure actions.

Moving forward, this case will return to the Supreme Court of Kings County for a hearing to determine whether McFarlane was validly served with the legal documents. If the court finds that service was indeed improper, McFarlane may be able to successfully vacate the default judgment against him and present a defense to the foreclosure.

The outcome of this case could influence how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly regarding the importance of service of process. It may also encourage defendants to assert their rights more vigorously in foreclosure proceedings, especially if they believe they have not been properly notified of legal actions against them.

As for next steps, the case is set to return to the lower court for further proceedings. It remains to be seen if the Bank of New York Mellon Trust will appeal this decision or if there are any related cases pending that could impact the outcome of McFarlane's situation.