The plaintiff, Casaplata Inc., brought an urgent motion seeking leave to issue a certificate of pending litigation (CPL) against a property owned by the individual defendants (the "Owners") to secure a prospective future judgment.
The property in question was not security for the plaintiff's original mortgage.
The defendant Sub-Prime Mortgage Corporation opposed the motion.
The court dismissed the motion, holding that a CPL is not intended to secure a damages claim or to preserve assets for future enforcement.
The court also found that the plaintiff misrepresented the urgency of the motion and failed to provide sufficient evidentiary support for its claims, leading to a substantial indemnity costs award against the plaintiff.
