In a significant ruling on May 20, 2026, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York upheld a foreclosure order against James J. Aliperti, Jr. and Marie Aliperti. The court's decision affirms the earlier ruling that allowed Astoria Federal Savings and Loan Association to proceed with the foreclosure of the Alipertis' property. This ruling affects the Aliperti family, who have been fighting against the foreclosure since the initial proceedings began in 2011. The outcome is crucial as it clarifies the timeline and legal parameters surrounding foreclosure actions in New York.

The case, Astoria Federal Savings & Loan Assn. v. Aliperti, was filed under docket number 2024-12738. The court's decision has implications for homeowners facing similar situations, particularly regarding the timeliness of legal motions in foreclosure cases.

The dispute originated in February 2011 when Astoria Federal Savings and Loan Association filed a foreclosure action against the Alipertis, asserting that they had defaulted on their mortgage obligations. The couple responded by claiming that the bank failed to comply with New York's Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (RPAPL) § 1304, which outlines specific requirements for mortgage lenders in the foreclosure process. The Alipertis argued that these failures should invalidate the foreclosure proceedings.

In 2014, the court ruled in favor of Astoria Federal, granting their motion for summary judgment, which effectively allowed the bank to move forward with the foreclosure. Following this ruling, a judgment of foreclosure and sale was entered on January 21, 2016, and the property was sold on November 30, 2023. The Alipertis did not appeal this judgment at the time, which is a critical factor in the court's latest ruling.

In March 2024, the Alipertis sought to renew their opposition to the prior summary judgment based on a change in the law regarding RPAPL § 1304. They claimed that recent legal clarifications warranted a reconsideration of their case. However, their motion was denied by the Supreme Court, leading them to appeal the decision.

The court ruled that the Alipertis' motion to renew was untimely. According to the court's opinion, "Once a final judgment has been entered, a motion pursuant to CPLR 2221(e)(2) based upon a change in the law must be made before the time to appeal the final judgment has expired." The judges on the panel included Francesca E. Connolly, Cheryl E. Chambers, Helen Voutsinas, and Elena Goldberg Velazquez.

The ruling emphasizes the importance of adhering to procedural timelines in legal proceedings. The judges noted that the Alipertis had not appealed the original foreclosure judgment or sought to renew their motion until nearly eight years had passed. This delay, the court found, undermined their attempt to challenge the foreclosure based on new legal interpretations.

This decision has significant implications for homeowners and lenders alike. For homeowners, it underscores the necessity of acting promptly when contesting foreclosure actions. The ruling indicates that failure to appeal or to seek timely relief can lead to the loss of property rights, even when there are claims of improper procedure by the lender.

For lenders, the ruling reinforces the stability of foreclosure judgments, provided they comply with statutory requirements. It signals to banks and financial institutions that they may proceed with foreclosure actions confidently if they follow the proper legal processes and timelines. This clarity is essential in a legal landscape where foreclosure laws can vary significantly from state to state.

Moreover, this case could set a precedent for future foreclosure actions in New York. It illustrates how courts may respond to claims of procedural violations, particularly when homeowners attempt to leverage changes in the law after a judgment has been rendered. It also highlights the importance of legal representation for homeowners facing foreclosure, as timely and strategic legal action is crucial to protect their rights.

Looking ahead, the Alipertis may have limited options for further legal recourse. The ruling can potentially be appealed to the New York Court of Appeals, but the likelihood of success would depend on demonstrating a substantial legal error in the Appellate Division's decision. Details were not available in the court filing regarding any related cases that may impact this ruling.

As this case illustrates, the intersection of foreclosure law and homeowners' rights remains a critical area of legal concern. The outcome not only affects the Aliperti family but also serves as a cautionary tale for other homeowners facing similar challenges in New York.