Daley v. Related Companies

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Daley v. Related Companies

236 A.D.2d 340, 655 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1662

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 340 (Daley v. Related Companies) 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

Daley v. Related Companies, 236 A.D.2d 340, 655 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1662 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered January 10, 1996, which, after a nonjury trial, to the extent appealed from, dismissed plaintiff’s claims with prejudice, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We decline to disturb the trial court’s factual findings, especially given that such findings rest in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses (see, Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495). Reliable, albeit contested, evidence supports all of the trial court’s essential factual conclusions. Plaintiff’s contentions represent nothing more that his own self-serving view of the evidence, which gives this Court no reason to disturb the subject judgment (see, Antzakas v Farmland Dairies, 202 AD2d 324). We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered January 10, 1996, which, after a nonjury trial, to the extent appealed from, dismissed plaintiff’s claims with prejudice, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We decline to disturb the trial court’s factual findings, especially given that such findings rest in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses (see, Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495). Reliable, albeit contested, evidence supports all of the trial court’s essential factual conclusions. Plaintiff’s contentions represent nothing more that his own self-serving view of the evidence, which gives this Court no reason to disturb the subject judgment (see, Antzakas v Farmland Dairies, 202 AD2d 324). We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 340, 655 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daley-v-related-companies-nyappdiv-1997.