July 27, 2009
BLUE HERON PINES HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., A NEW JERSEY NONPROFIT CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
PETER J. REGENYE AND SANDRA L. REGENYE, J/S/A, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Atlantic County, DC-7057-07.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted June 16, 2009
Before Judges Lisa and Collester.
Defendants Peter J. Regenye and Sandra L. Regenye appeal from an order granting summary judgment to Blue Heron Pines Homeowner's Association, Inc. in the amount of $4,394.28 representing unit assessments and legal fees due and owing from the date of the complaint through January 1, 2008. We affirm.
Defendants were the owners of a condominium unit at 512 West County Club Drive in Galloway Township. The property was subject to the declaration, rules and regulations of the Blue Heron Pines Homeowners' Association, which called for payment of a monthly maintenance assessment. Defendants' unit was the subject of a tax foreclosure with judgment entered on May 5, 2004. Subsequently, on application of defendants to stay eviction and vacate the final judgment, Judge William E. Nugent of the Chancery Division vacated the final judgment and directed that the mortgagor, Champion Mortgage Co., reimburse the purchaser of the tax sale certificate. As a result, defendants were not evicted at that time.
However, on November 9, 2007, a final judgment of foreclosure was entered in favor of Champion Mortgage, Co., and a writ of execution was entered. The sheriff's sale was conducted on January 10, 2008, resulting in the property reverting to Champion Mortgage for $100. As a result of the sheriff's sale, defendants were evicted from the property.
Judge Joseph E. Kane granted summary judgment to plaintiff after determining there were no material facts in dispute and for the following reasons:
The Defendants by way of their Answer allege that it would be difficult for her to pay the debt. However, the Defendant did not provide any supplemental evidence that would dispute the debt. Therefore, allegations by the Defendants do not create a genuine issue of material fact that enables them to survive a motion for summary judgment. Mere allegations are not enough to defeat a Motion for Summary Judgment. New Jersey Court Rules 1:6-6 and 4:46-2 require a Defendant to set forth specific facts showing that genuine issues of material fact exist for trial. Hence, Defendants are required to specifically plead the reasoning why the amount sought is incorrect and provide documentation to support such, if available. The Defendants have not satisfied this requirement.
Therefore, even investigation viewing the facts and inferences most favorable to the non-moving party, summary judgment is appropriate at this time.
We affirm substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Kane in his Memorandum of Decision annexed to his order granting summary judgment. The arguments made by defendants on appeal are without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.