The following papers were read in connection with plaintiff Ajax Mortgage Loan Trust's ("Ajax") Motion Seq. No. 2.

Plaintiff commenced the instant action to quiet title pursuant to Article 15 of the New York State Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (RPAPL). Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment and an Order directing that the satisfaction of mortgage recorded in the Westchester County Clerk's Office, dated June 13, 2018, be expunged (NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 1 & 15).

By way of background, on September 26, 1996, defendants obtained a mortgage ("Mortgage 1") for the property located at 151 Mayflower Ave, New Rochelle, NY 10801 (the "property"), in the amount of $97,500.00. Mortgage 1 was recorded with the Westchester County Clerk's office on November 15, 1996. Thereafter, on September 18, 2002, defendants obtained a second mortgage ("Mortgage 2"), on the same property in the amount of $56,276.52. Mortgage 2 was recorded with the Westchester County Clerk's office on November 22, 2002. On the same day, September 18, 2002, defendants consolidated both Mortgage 1 and Mortgage 2 via a CEMA (Consolidation, Extension, and Modification Agreement) into one lien amount of $120,000, which was recorded in the Westchester County Clerk's Office on November 22, 2002.

The CEMA was assigned to plaintiff Ajax on May 25, 2023, from its predecessor in interest, defendant Federal National Mortgage Association ("FNMA"). On June 11, 2018, FNMA executed a Satisfaction of Mortgage on Mortgage 1 and recorded it with the Westchester County Clerk's office on June 13, 2018. Ajax claims that Mortgage 1 had not been satisfied when the satisfaction of mortgage was recorded and, therefore, it was an erroneous filing which has created a cloud on the chain of title.

By Notice of Motion dated June 19, 2025, plaintiff seeks an Order directing the Westchester County Clerk to expunge the satisfaction of mortgage dated June 11, 2018, and reinstating Mortgage 1 to be a valid lien and encumbrance against the property in question (NYSCEF Doc. No. 26).

Defendants have not appeared in this action, and, as such, there is no opposition to the within motion.

In the affirmation in support of the instant motion, filed on June 16, 2015, plaintiff's counsel argues that plaintiff has satisfied the requirements for entry of a default judgment against defendants Amelia Loretoni, Claire Disapia, and New York State Department of Taxation & Finance, pursuant to CPLR 3125 (a) (NYSCEF Doc. No. 27).^[FN1] Plaintiff relies on the Affirmation of Merit by Lonna Cross, Director Title Curative of NewRez, LLC, D/B/A Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, F/K/A Specialized Loan Servicing ("NewRez") (NYSCEF Doc. No. 40). NewRez is the loan servicer for Ajax (NYSCEF Doc. No. 41). In her affirmation, Ms. Cross states that in her role, she has inspected the servicing records related to the subject transactions. After such review, she determined that Mortgage 1 has not been satisfied, and that the indebtedness is still due and owing to plaintiff. The filing of the satisfaction of mortgage was therefore erroneous.

Notably, neither the affirmation in support of the within motion or the affirmation of merit referenced above contain the requisite language of CPLR 2106.

When considering a motion for default judgment "the movant must provide "proof of service of the summons and complaint . . . proof of the facts constituting the claim, the default and the amount due" (CPLR 3215). Effective January 1, 2024, CPLR 2016 was revised, and provides that "[t]he statement of any person wherever made, subscribed and affirmed by that person to be true under the penalties of perjury, may be used in an action in New York in lieu of and with the same force and effect as an affidavit. Such affirmation shall be in substantially in the following form: I affirm this _ day of __, __, under the penalties of perjury under the laws of New York, which may include a fine or imprisonment, that the foregoing is true, and I understand that this document may be filed in an action or proceeding in a court of law." As is evident, this requirement applies to attorneys.

Here, both the affirmation in support of the motion submitted by Daniel Hughes, Esq., and the affirmation of merit by Lonna Cross, Director Title Curative of NewRez, are inadmissible as they do not contain the specific language required by CPLR 2106 (see Kallo v Kane St. Synagogue, — AD3d —, 2025 NY Slip Op 04558 [2nd Dept 2025]); Great Lakes Ins. SE v American S.S. Owners Mut. Protection & Indem. Assn. Inc., 228 AD3d 429 [1st Dept 2024]; Fifth Partners LLC v Foley, 227 AD3d 543 [1st Dept 2024]; Matter of Grandsard v Hutchinson, 227 AD3d 491 [1st Dept 2024]).

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED, plaintiff's motion for an Order directing the Office of the Westchester County Clerk to expunge the satisfaction of mortgage recorded in the Westchester County Clerk's Office on June 13, 2018, at Control No. 581633718, and reinstating the mortgage dated September 26, 1996 and recorded in the Westchester County Clerk's Office on November 15, 1996 as Liber 22221, Page 214, to be a valid lien and encumbrance against the premises known as and by 151 Mayflower Ave, New Rochelle New York 10801 is DENIED, without prejudice, and it is further;

ORDERED, that plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Order with notice of entry on all parties and persons entitled to notice.

This constitutes the decision and order of this Court.