Velasco v. 34-06 73rd Street, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Velasco v. 34-06 73rd Street, LLC

122 A.D.3d 724, 994 N.Y.S.2d 864

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

DecidedNovember 12, 2014

Docket2013-05922

StatusPublished

This text of 122 A.D.3d 724 (Velasco v. 34-06 73rd Street, LLC) 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

Velasco v. 34-06 73rd Street, LLC, 122 A.D.3d 724, 994 N.Y.S.2d 864 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for the return of a down payment given pursuant to a contract for the sale of real property, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Risi, J.H.O.), dated April 3, 2013, which, upon a decision of the same court dated November 10, 2010, made after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendant 34-06 73rd Street, LLC, and against them, and directs the escrow agent to remit the down payment to the defendant 34-06 73rd Street, LLC.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

“In reviewing a decision made after a nonjury trial, the power of this Court is as broad as that of the trial court, and we may render a judgment we find warranted by the facts, bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses” (DeAngelis v DeAngelis, 104 AD3d 901, 902 [2013] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]). Here, we find that the judgment of the Supreme Court was warranted by the facts presented at trial.

Eng, EJ., Dillon, Duffy and Barros, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, for the return of a down payment given pursuant to a contract for the sale of real property, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Risi, J.H.O.), dated April 3, 2013, which, upon a decision of the same court dated November 10, 2010, made after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendant 34-06 73rd Street, LLC, and against them, and directs the escrow agent to remit the down payment to the defendant 34-06 73rd Street, LLC.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

“In reviewing a decision made after a nonjury trial, the power of this Court is as broad as that of the trial court, and we may render a judgment we find warranted by the facts, bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses” (DeAngelis v DeAngelis, 104 AD3d 901, 902 [2013] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]). Here, we find that the judgment of the Supreme Court was warranted by the facts presented at trial.

Eng, EJ., Dillon, Duffy and Barros, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 A.D.3d 724, 994 N.Y.S.2d 864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/velasco-v-34-06-73rd-street-llc-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack