Plaza Funding Corp. v. J. C. Development Corp.

155 A.D.2d 298, 547 N.Y.S.2d 62, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14028
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 14, 1989
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 155 A.D.2d 298 (Plaza Funding Corp. v. J. C. Development Corp.) 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
Plaza Funding Corp. v. J. C. Development Corp., 155 A.D.2d 298, 547 N.Y.S.2d 62, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14028 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leonard N. Cohen, J.), entered July 10, 1989, which granted the motion of defendants Subliflex, Inc. and Rejo Realty Corp. for summary judgment and to confirm the report of the Referee dated March 9, 1989, which denied the cross motion of plaintiff to reject the Referee’s report and to extend its notice of pendency, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The Referee properly found that the delivery and recording of the deed to the underlying premises by defendant on February 9, 1984 was the direct result of defendant’s 1981 lawsuit and notice of pendency, and the basis for the judicially supervised settlement of that action. Thus, the deed was not taken subject to plaintiff’s 1983 notice of pendency. The report of a Referee should be confirmed if the findings are supported by the record (Namer v 152-54-56 W. 15th St. Realty Corp., 108 AD2d 705). "Generally, New York courts will look with favor upon a Referee’s report, inasmuch as the Referee, as trier of fact, is considered to be in the best position to determine the issues presented.” (Matter of Holy Spirit Assn. v Tax Commn., [299]*29981 AD2d 64, 70-71, revd on other grounds 55 NY2d 512.) The Referee herein clearly defined the issue, resolved conflicting testimony and matters of credibility (Kardanis v Velis, 90 AD2d 727), and the findings were supported by the record. Concur — Ross, J. P., Asch, Milonas, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.

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

Related

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Chung
2021 NY Slip Op 02982 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Hall v. King
177 Misc. 2d 126 (New York Supreme Court, 1998)
Fidelity New York FSB v. Madden
228 A.D.2d 473 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Kaplan v. Einy
209 A.D.2d 248 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
United States Trust Co. v. Olsen
194 A.D.2d 481 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Frankel v. Winter
180 A.D.2d 549 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Arbitration between Scarab Equities Corp. & 684 Owners Corp.
170 A.D.2d 409 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
155 A.D.2d 298, 547 N.Y.S.2d 62, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plaza-funding-corp-v-j-c-development-corp-nyappdiv-1989.