Nelson v. McKay

41 A.D.3d 802, 837 N.Y.S.2d 589
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 26, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 41 A.D.3d 802 (Nelson v. McKay) 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
Nelson v. McKay, 41 A.D.3d 802, 837 N.Y.S.2d 589 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In an action, in effect, to impose a constructive trust on certain real property, in which the defendant counterclaimed for, inter alia, a direction that she convey title to the property into the parties’ names as joint tenants with right of survivorship, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.H.O.), dated November 8, 2006, which, after a nonjury trial, and upon a decision of the same court dated September 30, 2006, inter alia, imposed a constructive trust in the form of a tenancy in common in the name of the plaintiff and the defendant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Upon review of a determination rendered after a nonjury trial, this Court’s authority “is as broad as that of the trial court, [and this Court may] render the judgment it finds warranted by the facts, taking into account in a close case ‘the fact that the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witness’ ” (Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of [803]*803Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983], quoting York Mtge. Corp. v Clotar Constr. Corp., 254 NY 128, 133-134 [1930]; see Vizzari v Hernández, 1 AD3d 431, 431-432 [2003]). We discern no reason to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination, inter alia, imposing a constructive trust in favor of the plaintiff upon one half of the interest in the subject property currently deeded to the defendant (see Simonds v Simonds, 45 NY2d 233, 241 [1978]; Sharp v Kosmalski, 40 NY2d 119, 121 [1976]; Ruiz v Meloney, 26 AD3d 485, 486 [2006]; Nastasi v Nastasi, 26 AD3d 32, 38 [2005]; Eickler v Pecora, 12 AD3d 635, 636 [2004]; Williams v Lynch, 245 AD2d 715, 716-717 [1997]). Rivera, J.P., Goldstein, Skelos and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Jean v. Michael M. Molaei, M.D., P.C.
57 A.D.3d 620 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Perfect Crown Vic v. Douce Hacking Corp.
56 A.D.2d 448 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
DiLorenzo v. Estate Motors, Inc.
44 A.D.3d 702 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 A.D.3d 802, 837 N.Y.S.2d 589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-v-mckay-nyappdiv-2007.