Bank of New York v. Bailey, 460 Mass. 327 (2011)

Citation: Bank of New York v. Bailey, 460 Mass. 327 (2011)
Parent Document: Bank of New York v. Bailey, 460 Mass. 327 (2011)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2011-08-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2530555/bank-of-new-york-v-bailey/ ↗

Full Text

705 chars

opposing the motion, Bailey contended that BNY’s “ownership” of Bailey’s home “remains in dispute, because notice of the foreclosure sale . . . was legally insufficient.” Concluding that Bailey’s challenge to the validity of the foreclosure was not within the Housing Court’s jurisdiction, the judge allowed BNY’s motion. The judge reasoned that “[t]he only issue before the [cjourt is whether the [pjlaintiff is entitled to possession,” and because BNY showed that “its deed was recorded prior to the service of the [njotice to [q]uit,” BNY had established a prima face case for possession. 2. Discussion. We review a decision to grant summary judgment de novo. See Ritter v. Massachusetts Cas. Ins. Co.,

Other Sections in This Document (68)

Full Text