In Treeline Garden City Plaza v. UBS Warburg Ral Estate, Inc., 3 Misc 3d 1109[A], 2004 NY Slip Op 50519[U] (NY Sup Ct 2004]) the mortgagor, Treeline GCP, and guarantor, Treeline Whitman Associates, sought a declaration that they may proceed with a proposed financial transaction which changed ownership interest in the mortgage in order to get an infusion of cash for the mortgagor's business. Pursuant to the mortgage between the mortgagor and mortgagee, the mortgagor was required to get mortgagee's permission for any transfer of ownership. The mortgagor and guarantor sought permission from the mortgagee's servicer, Wachovia, for this proposed transaction. Permission was ultimately denied pursuant to Section 13(b)(v) of the mortgage which provides that a transfer includes "any pledge, hypothecation, assignment, transfer or other encumbrance of any direct or indirect ownership interest in the Mortgagor." The mortgagor commenced the Treeline action seeking a declaration that the mortgagee's consent was not needed pursuant to the language of the mortgage documents. However, if it was, they sought reformation or rescission of the documents on the ground of mutual or unilateral mistake with respect to the need for the mortgagee's consent for a transfer of ownership. They also sought damages from the original lender on the grounds of fraudulent inducement. The Treeline court found that the mortgagee's consent was required for any transfer of ownership, that there was no mutual or unilateral mistake, and that the mortgage documents were enforceable, and dismissed their claim for fraudulent inducement.