The plaintiff, James F. OLeary, separately filed two, now consolidated, actions in 2012. The first action sought to forestall foreclosure on a home in Springfield; failing that, the second action asserted claims of wrongful foreclosure. The gist of OLearys claims was that the defendant, HSBC Bank USA, N.A. (HSBC), which foreclosed on the property, was not the lawful mortgagee. HSBC counterclaimed for possession. The note and mortgage are in default and have been for several years. In a series of orders culminating in a final judgment, a Superior Court judge dismissed OLearys claims and granted judgment of possession to HSBC. OLeary appeals. We affirm.
Discussion. This is the second appeal to come before this court regarding the mortgage on the property at 127 Bowles Park in Springfield. In 2012, the Land Court entered a declaratory judgment that HSBC was the current mortgage holder on the property, and this court affirmed that judgment on November 21, 2013. See HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. OLeary, 84 Mass. App. Ct. 1121 (2013). Thereafter, and relying on the affirmed judgment from the Land Court, a Superior Court judge dismissed OLearys claims and granted summary judgment on HSBCs counterclaims for possession.
In this appeal, OLeary asserts a variety of errors, among them: (1) that HSBCs counterclaims for possession were transferred to the Housing Court, but then improperly returned to the Superior Court, and that various docket entries relating to this transfer were improperly ordered to be erased by the Superior Court judge, and (2) that in dismissing OLearys wrongful foreclosure claims the Superior Court judge improperly relied on the Land Court judgment declaring that HSBC was the mortgage holder.
We have carefully considered OLearys arguments, and they are without merit. The counterclaim for possession was properly within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court, and the judge acted within his discretion in retaining jurisdiction. See Bank of New York v. Bailey, 460 Mass. 327, 333 (2011) (The Housing Courts jurisdiction over [possession] is concurrent with that of the District Court and Superior Court); Bank of America, N.A. v. Rosa, 466 Mass. 613, 622-626 (2013). In addition, HSBCs status as mortgagee was established in the prior litigation between the parties, and there was no error in the Courts decision granting judgment of possession. The judgment is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Orders denying motions for reconsideration affirmed.
To the extent we have not explicitly discussed them, we have carefully considered each of the plaintiffs remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit.