Cespedes v. Echavarria

• Court: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
• Decided: December 20, 2019
• Docket: 2019 NYSlipOp 52084(U)
• Status: Published

Opinion

Jose R. Cespedes, Plaintiff-Respondent, Dr.

against

Nelson Echavarria, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Lisa A. Sokoloff, J.), entered December 7, 2017, after a nonjury trial, in favor of the plaintiff and awarding him damages in the principal sum of $10,000.

Per Curiam.

Judgment (Lisa A. Sokoloff, J.), entered December 7, 2017, affirmed, without costs.

On a nonjury trial, the decision of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed on appeal unless the court's conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495 [1992]). Applying that review standard here, we sustain the judgment in plaintiff's favor. The totality of the evidence before the trial court supports the determination that defendant failed to repay $10,000 that was loaned or entrusted to him by plaintiff. The evidence supporting the determination consisted of plaintiff's credited testimony and two letters signed by the defendant acknowledging the $10,000 debt and promising to return said sum to plaintiff within thirty days of the date of the letter. The trial court, which was in a position to assess the credibility of witnesses, rejected the testimony of defendant and his witnesses and properly concluded that defendant's contentions of fraud and illegality were untenable and unsupported.

Defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur

Decision Date: December 20, 2019