Motion-Secondary: Federal National Mortgage Association "FANNIE MAE" A CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES v. Frank Amato, Matthew Amato, Capital One Bank, Citibank, N.A., Joseph Tarantello

• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                At an IAS Part ____ of the Supreme Court of
                                                         the State of New York, County of Nassau, at the
                                                         Courthouse located at 1 Supreme Court Drive,
                                                         Riverhead, New York 11901 on the _____ of
                                                         May 2023

___________________________, J.S.C.
-------------------------------------------------------------------x
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
ASSOCIATION (“FANNIE MAE”), A
CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND
EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE                                          Index No.: 015989/2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                            Plaintiff,

                                 v.                                          ORDER TO SHOW
                                                                                 CAUSE
FRANK AMATO, MATTHEW AMATO,
CAPITAL ONE BANK, CITIBANK, N.A.,
AND JOSEPH TARANTELLO,

                                             Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------------------x

         UPON the annexed affirmations of CHRISTOPHER THOMPSON, ESQ. dated May 23,

2023, the Affidavit of FRANK AMATO sworn to on May 23, 2023, and any and all exhibits

annexed thereto or references pursuant to CPLR § 2214(c) therein, and upon the pleadings and

proceedings heretofore had herein,


         LET THE PLAINTIFF SHOW CAUSE before this court at an IAS part

_____________ thereof, to be held at the Courthouse located at 1 Supreme Court Drive,

Riverhead, New York 11901, on the ____ day of ____________ 2023 at ___ o’clock in the

a.m./p.m. of that day, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, why an order should not be

made as follows: (a) renewing Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and upon renewal,

reversing the order granting summary judgment, pursuant to CPLR § 2221(e) and/or in the
interests of substantial justice; (b) vacating the judgment of foreclosure and sale in the interests

of substantial justice and pursuant to pursuant to CPLR § 2221(d) and (e) and CPLR §

5015(a)(1); (c) and alternatively, if the Court does no vacate the above orders, for an order

pursuant to CPLR § 5001 striking interest for the time periods during which the Plaintiff failed to

timely prosecute this action; and (d) granting any such other and further relief in support of

Defendant as this Court may deem just and proper.



       SUFFICIENT CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, it is further ORDERED that service

of a copy of this order, together with the papers upon which it is granted, be served upon

Plaintiff’s counsel, Robertson, Anschutz, Schneid, Crane & Partners, PLLC, 900 Merchants

Concourse, Suite 106, Westbury, NY 11590 and any party appearing herein on or before

_____________________________ by any method authorized by CPLR § 2103 [and/or via

uploading the conformed order to show cause to NYSCEF], BE DEEMED GOOD AND

SUFFICIENT SERVICE THEREOF.



                                                     ENTER



                                                     __________________________________
                                                      J.S.C.




                                                 2