Purta v. Cisz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Purta v. Cisz

47 A.D.2d 850, 368 N.Y.S.2d 814, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9197

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 24, 1975·Published

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to declare a deed made by plaintiffs’ testator to be a forgery, plaintiffs appeal from an order-judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated May 6, 1974, which is in favor of defendant, after a nonjury trial. Order-judgment affirmed, with costs. Even if the Trial Justice’s statement that plaintiffs had the burden of establishing the validity of the releases in issue were to be deemed erroneous, upon the proof adduced we find that defendant did in fact prove the validity by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Munder and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to declare a deed made by plaintiffs’ testator to be a forgery, plaintiffs appeal from an order-judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated May 6, 1974, which is in favor of defendant, after a nonjury trial. Order-judgment affirmed, with costs. Even if the Trial Justice’s statement that plaintiffs had the burden of establishing the validity of the releases in issue were to be deemed erroneous, upon the proof adduced we find that defendant did in fact prove the validity by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Munder and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Purta v. Cisz, 47 A.D.2d 850, 368 N.Y.S.2d 814, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9197 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

47 A.D.2d 850 (Purta v. Cisz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.