Wright v. Connor

228 A.D.2d 493, 643 N.Y.2d 1002, 643 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6580

Opinion

Contrary to the appellant’s contentions, the verdict of the Supreme Court finding liability premised on a theory of conversion was not against the weight of the evidence. A cause of action for conversion requires a showing that the defendant exercised unauthorized dominion over the plaintiffs’ property to the exclusion of the plaintiffs’ rights (see, Della Pietra v State of New York, 125 AD2d 936, affd 71 NY2d 792; see also, Salt Springs Natl. Bank v Wheeler, 48 NY 492, 495; AMF Inc. v Algo Distribs., 48 AD2d 352, 356). The conflicting evidence presented a question of credibility which the fact-finder resolved in the plaintiffs’ favor (see, Buckenberger v Clark Constr. Corp., 208 AD2d 790; Stutman v Ortel, 150 AD2d 555, 556; Pannetta v Ramo, 138 AD2d 686, 687).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.