Flores v. Citizens International Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Flores v. Citizens International Bank

225 A.D.2d 414, 640 N.Y.2d 746, 640 N.Y.S.2d 746, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2726

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

DecidedMarch 19, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 414 (Flores v. Citizens International Bank) 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

Flores v. Citizens International Bank, 225 A.D.2d 414, 640 N.Y.2d 746, 640 N.Y.S.2d 746, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2726 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Since the jury was instructed to consider interest in its deliberations as to damages and the verdict was in excess of the loan principal, the trial court properly found plaintiffs were not entitled to prejudgment interest (see, Men’s World Outlet v Estate of Steinberg, 101 AD2d 854; 5 Weinstein-KornMiller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 5001.14). We agree with the trial court that, in view of the evidence presented, the jury could reasonably find that fraud had not been proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

This Court will not consider defendant’s arguments for affirmative relief since defendant’s appeal was dismissed for lack of prosecution, which dismissal is the functional equivalent of an affirmance (see, Matter of Ellsman, 77 NY2d 926). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.

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

Since the jury was instructed to consider interest in its deliberations as to damages and the verdict was in excess of the loan principal, the trial court properly found plaintiffs were not entitled to prejudgment interest (see, Men’s World Outlet v Estate of Steinberg, 101 AD2d 854; 5 Weinstein-KornMiller, NY Civ Prac ¶ 5001.14). We agree with the trial court that, in view of the evidence presented, the jury could reasonably find that fraud had not been proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

This Court will not consider defendant’s arguments for affirmative relief since defendant’s appeal was dismissed for lack of prosecution, which dismissal is the functional equivalent of an affirmance (see, Matter of Ellsman, 77 NY2d 926). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 414, 640 N.Y.2d 746, 640 N.Y.S.2d 746, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2726, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flores-v-citizens-international-bank-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack