Barr v. Barr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Barr v. Barr

232 A.D.2d 316, 648 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10561

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 29, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 232 A.D.2d 316 (Barr v. Barr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barr v. Barr, 232 A.D.2d 316, 648 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10561 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered February 3, 1995, which, inter alia, confirmed the report of the Special Referee dated September 13, 1994, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It being the function of a Special Referee to hear the evidence and resolve questions of fact and credibility, his or her findings generally will not be disturbed if substantially supported by the record (Kardanis v Velis, 90 AD2d 727; Dilorio v Gibson & Cushman, 204 AD2d 167). The court properly perceived an ambiguity in the parties’ stipulated agreement warranting submission of the matter to a Special Referee, and properly confirmed his findings as supported by the record. We have reviewed the parties’ remaining arguments for affirmative relief and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Ross, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered February 3, 1995, which, inter alia, confirmed the report of the Special Referee dated September 13, 1994, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It being the function of a Special Referee to hear the evidence and resolve questions of fact and credibility, his or her findings generally will not be disturbed if substantially supported by the record (Kardanis v Velis, 90 AD2d 727; Dilorio v Gibson & Cushman, 204 AD2d 167). The court properly perceived an ambiguity in the parties’ stipulated agreement warranting submission of the matter to a Special Referee, and properly confirmed his findings as supported by the record. We have reviewed the parties’ remaining arguments for affirmative relief and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Ross, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D.2d 316, 648 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barr-v-barr-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack