Mandates a stay of foreclosure sales in all actions where a defendant has filed and perfected an appeal from a judgment of foreclosure and sale
This bill amends New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules to create an automatic stay of enforcement in foreclosure-and-sale cases when a defendant has filed and perfected an appeal from the foreclosure judgment. Under the bill, once the defendant files a notice of appeal, the judgment of foreclosure and sale could not be enforced while the appeal is pending, unless the defendant expressly waives the stay.
The measure overrides the ordinary court-order stay framework in CPLR 5519 for this category of cases by making the stay mandatory rather than discretionary. It applies specifically to actions involving a judgment of foreclosure and sale and takes effect immediately upon enactment.
The bill would change state appellate and foreclosure procedure by adding a new automatic protection for homeowners and other defendants appealing foreclosure judgments. It would limit a lender’s ability to proceed with a foreclosure sale during the appeal period, potentially delaying transfer of property and enforcement of foreclosure judgments until the appeal is resolved or dismissed. The affected statute is CPLR section 5519, and the practical impact would fall on mortgage lenders, borrowers, foreclosure attorneys, courts, and purchasers at foreclosure sales.
Based on the bill’s caption and limited context, the measure appears to be consumer-protective and aimed at preserving defendants’ rights during foreclosure appeals. No committee transcript or recorded vote is available here, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the provided materials. The bill’s introduction by committee on rules at the request of a member suggests it was formally advanced, but the overall sentiment cannot be measured beyond the bill’s apparent intent to protect appellants from losing property before appellate review is complete.
The main point of contention is likely the balance between protecting appellants’ rights and preventing delay in foreclosure enforcement. Supporters would view the automatic stay as necessary to avoid irreparable harm if a property is sold before an appeal is decided, while opponents may argue it could encourage delay tactics, increase uncertainty for lenders and buyers, and slow the foreclosure process. Because no transcript or vote record is provided, the specific positions of legislators, advocates, lenders, or homeowner groups are not documented in the materials supplied.