Martinez v. Garcia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martinez v. Garcia

221 A.D.2d 443, 634 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11876

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 221 A.D.2d 443 (Martinez v. Garcia) 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

Martinez v. Garcia, 221 A.D.2d 443, 634 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11876 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding, inter alia, for the partition of real property, the petitioner appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), dated November 5, 1993, which, inter alia, declared that both parties owned 50% of the property, and that if either party paid more than one half of the mortgage, upon resale, that party would receive from the other party the amount in excess thereof.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The record supports the court’s finding that the respondent, who had a limited knowledge of English and of finance, had a confidential relationship with her son, the petitioner. In light of this relationship, it was the petitioner’s burden to disprove the respondent’s testimony that she paid the petitioner $500 per month towards expenses of the house (see, Matter of Gordon v Bialystoker Ctr. & Bikur Cholim, 45 NY2d 692). We find that the petitioner failed to satisfy this burden. Accordingly, the court’s determination shall not be disturbed.

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding, inter alia, for the partition of real property, the petitioner appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), dated November 5, 1993, which, inter alia, declared that both parties owned 50% of the property, and that if either party paid more than one half of the mortgage, upon resale, that party would receive from the other party the amount in excess thereof.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The record supports the court’s finding that the respondent, who had a limited knowledge of English and of finance, had a confidential relationship with her son, the petitioner. In light of this relationship, it was the petitioner’s burden to disprove the respondent’s testimony that she paid the petitioner $500 per month towards expenses of the house (see, Matter of Gordon v Bialystoker Ctr. & Bikur Cholim, 45 NY2d 692). We find that the petitioner failed to satisfy this burden. Accordingly, the court’s determination shall not be disturbed.

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 443, 634 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11876, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinez-v-garcia-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack