Stephanie N. Rojas is an Associate in the firm’s litigation group and has more than a decade of experience litigating contested residential and commercial foreclosure actions on behalf of banks, loan servicers, and investors at both the trial and appellate level. She also has an extensive background litigating tax foreclosures, surplus money proceedings, quiet title actions, and eviction proceedings. Prior to joining ZEK, Stephanie gained expertise handling contested matters at foreclosure and landlord-tenant law firms. Stephanie’s experience includes drafting pre-answer motions, motions for summary judgment, oppositions to motions and Orders to Show Cause, appellate briefs, discovery, and oral argument. She has successfully argued appeals before the First and Second Appellate Divisions. Stephanie has comprehensive knowledge of the CPLR and has obtained several court decisions awarding motions premised on creative and complex arguments. Outside of work, Stephanie enjoys cooking feasts and spending time with her husband and four children. REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS Yakte Properties v. Todd Milner, 234 A.D.3d 647 (1st Dept. 2025) handled appeal on behalf of plaintiff where the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the lower court’s order denying defendant’s cross-motion to dismiss the complaint based on alleged documentary evidence and failure to state a claim, and for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as barred by the statute of limitations. B&B Capital, LLC v. Albert Pezone, 241 A.D.3d 614 (2nd Dept. 2025) handled appeal on behalf of plaintiff where defendant appealed the order denying his motion for summary judgment premised on the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act and the statute of limitations. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the lower court’s determination that plaintiff’s action was timely commenced. Bank of America, N.A. v. Mohammed Ali, 202 A.D.3d 726 (2nd Dept. 2022) handled appeal on behalf of plaintiff where the Appellate Division, Second Department reversed the lower court’s order denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate a conditional order of dismissal and to restore the action to the active calendar. The appeal resulted in the revival of an improperly dismissed action where recommencement would have been time-barred.U.S. Bank v. Thompson, 189 AD3d 1643 (2nd Dept. 2020) handled appeal on behalf of plaintiff which established precedent in the Appellate Division, Second Department, that a motion pursuant to CPLR 2221(a) is not subject to any specific time limitation.