Capetola v. Pelgrim
This text of 91 A.D.3d 607 (Capetola v. Pelgrim) 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.
Opinion
Upon review of a determination rendered after a nonjury trial, this Court’s authority “is as broad as that of the trial court,” and this Court may “render the judgment it finds war[608]*608ranted by the facts, taking into account in a close case the fact that the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses” (Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Applying these principles, we discern no basis to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination.
The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Dillon, J.R, Balkin, Leventhal and Chambers, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
91 A.D.3d 607, 936 N.Y.2d 553, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/capetola-v-pelgrim-nyappdiv-2012.