Freedom Mortgage Corp. v. Engel
Freedom Mortg. Corp. v. Engel, 37 N.Y.3d 1 (2021)
- Court
- New York Court of Appeals
- Decided
- 2021-02-18
- Docket
- Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4
What happened
In four consolidated cases, lenders had accelerated loans by filing foreclosure suits, then voluntarily dropped them and sued again years later. Borrowers argued the six-year limit had run.
What the court decided
New York's highest court held that when a foreclosure suit accelerated the debt, the lender's voluntary discontinuance of that suit revoked the acceleration, restarting the installment schedule.
In the court's words
“the noteholder’s voluntary withdrawal of that action revokes the election to accelerate”
Why it may matter to you
It shows how lenders can reset limitations clocks — and how legislatures respond. Compare Boren in Texas.
Why it might not apply
New York's Legislature later changed this rule by statute (the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act, 2022). Treat this case as history and check current New York law.
Most useful when
- A lender dropped an earlier foreclosure case and later sued again
How to cite it
The full citation for the first time you mention it, a short form for later, and a sample sentence you can adapt.
Freedom Mortg. Corp. v. Engel, 37 N.Y.3d 1 (2021)Short formEngel, 37 N.Y.3d 1Draft — check it with free legal aid before you file or say it in court.
In Freedom Mortg. Corp. v. Engel, 37 N.Y.3d 1 (2021), the court held that a noteholder's voluntary discontinuance of a foreclosure action that accelerated the debt revokes the acceleration. Here, [say in one sentence what happened in your case]
Ask Techy about this case
Techy explains the case in plain words, why it may matter to you, its limits, and how to prepare. It only uses this case record.
Related cases
- Homeowner wonBinding
Holy Cross Church of God in Christ v. Wolf
44 S.W.3d 562 · Decided 2001
A church's note was accelerated, but years passed before the note holder tried to foreclose. The church asked a court to declare that the time to foreclose had run out.
Read the case - Homeowner lostOther state
Bartram v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n
211 So. 3d 1009 · Decided 2016
A first foreclosure against Mr. Bartram was dismissed. Years later he argued the five-year limit barred any new foreclosure.
Read the case - Homeowner lostBinding in federal court
Boren v. U.S. National Bank Ass'n
807 F.3d 99 · Decided 2015
The Borens argued their bank waited too long — more than four years after accelerating — to foreclose. The bank pointed to later notices asking for less than the full balance.
Read the case