A New York appeals court just ruled lenders can't restart the foreclosure clock by dropping and refiling cases. Here's why this matters for your business
A New York appeals court just drew a hard line: lenders can’t restart the foreclosure clock by dropping and refiling cases, even if years have passed.
On July 30, 2025, the Appellate Division, Second Department, issued its decision in Medina v New York Mellon Trust Co., N.A.—a ruling that should make every mortgage professional in New York sit up and take notice. The court found that once a lender accelerates a mortgage and starts a foreclosure, the six-year statute of limitations begins, and voluntarily discontinuing that action doesn’t give lenders a fresh start.
Here’s how it unfolded. In October 2006, Julio Medina, Jr., through his attorney-in-fact, signed a consolidated note and a consolidation, extension, and modification agreement, putting his Bayside property on the line. In June 2008, Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. (BNY), or its predecessor, filed a foreclosure action against Medina and others. That action accelerated the mortgage debt, making the entire amount due and starting the six-year clock for foreclosure.
But in December 2012, the 2008 foreclosure action was discontinued by a so-ordered stipulation. Four years later, in December 2016, Medina filed a lawsuit against BNY under RPAPL 1501(4), seeking to cancel and discharge the mortgage from the record, arguing that the statute of limitations for foreclosure had expired. BNY responded with various affirmative defenses. Then, in August 2018, BNY filed a new foreclosure action against Medina, again seeking to enforce the same mortgage.
Medina moved for summary judgment—asking the court to rule in his favor without a trial—and to dismiss several of BNY’s affirmative defenses. BNY opposed and cross-moved to consolidate Medina’s action with its own 2018 foreclosure action. The Supreme Court, Queens County, denied Medina’s motion and allowed the actions to be tried jointly. Medina appealed.
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s decision. The judges found that Medina had shown the mortgage debt was accelerated in June 2008, and that the six-year statute of limitations started then. When Medina filed his lawsuit in 2016, more than six years had passed, so any new foreclosure action—like BNY’s 2018 case—was time-barred.
A key part of the ruling was the application of the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA), which took effect in December 2022. The court made it clear: under FAPA, voluntarily discontinuing a foreclosure action does not reset the statute of limitations. The court also rejected BNY’s challenges to FAPA’s retroactive application and constitutionality, citing recent appellate decisions that have already addressed those arguments.
So, what does this mean for mortgage professionals? The message is simple and direct: if you start a foreclosure and accelerate the debt, you have six years to act. Dropping the case and starting over won’t buy you more time. If you miss that window, you lose the right to foreclose.
For lenders, servicers, and anyone managing defaulted loans, Medina v New York Mellon Trust Co., N.A. is a clear reminder to keep a close eye on foreclosure timelines. The law is designed to prevent endless cycles of litigation and to bring finality to foreclosure proceedings. If you’re not tracking your deadlines, you could be left holding an unenforceable mortgage.
As foreclosure law continues to evolve in New York, staying current isn’t just good practice—it’s essential for protecting your business and your bottom line. This ruling puts the onus squarely on lenders and servicers to act promptly and within the law, or risk losing their chance to enforce a mortgage altogether.
