Kapoor v. Jaggi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kapoor v. Jaggi

191 A.D.2d 479, 596 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2096

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

DecidedMarch 8, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 191 A.D.2d 479 (Kapoor v. Jaggi) 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

Kapoor v. Jaggi, 191 A.D.2d 479, 596 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2096 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to compel the defendants to vacate the subject premises, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Modugno, J.H.O.), dated April 17, 1990, as, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint.

[480]*480Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

It is well settled that " '[a] decision rendered by a court after a nonjury trial should not be disturbed on appeal unless it is clear that its conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence’ ” (Kreisler Borg Florman Gen. Constr. Co. v Rosen & Morelli Masons, 181 AD2d 813, 814, quoting Alleva v Alleva Dairy, 129 AD2d 663). It cannot be said that the verdict herein could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence. Therefore, the trial court’s determination should not be disturbed. Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to compel the defendants to vacate the subject premises, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Modugno, J.H.O.), dated April 17, 1990, as, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint.

[480]*480Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

It is well settled that " '[a] decision rendered by a court after a nonjury trial should not be disturbed on appeal unless it is clear that its conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence’ ” (Kreisler Borg Florman Gen. Constr. Co. v Rosen & Morelli Masons, 181 AD2d 813, 814, quoting Alleva v Alleva Dairy, 129 AD2d 663). It cannot be said that the verdict herein could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence. Therefore, the trial court’s determination should not be disturbed. Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 479, 596 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2096, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kapoor-v-jaggi-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack