Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Joseph Famigletti and Karen Rappaport v. John Torres

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


March 1, 2011

JOSEPH FAMIGLETTI AND KAREN RAPPAPORT,
RESPONDENTS,
v.
JOHN TORRES,
APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Carolyn E. Wade, J.), entered July 17, 2009.

Famigletti v Torres

Decided on March 1, 2011

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and STEINHARDT, JJ

The judgment, after a non-jury trial, awarded plaintiffs the principal sum of $5,000.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover the sum of $16,400 allegedly due on a loan. Defendant claimed that there was no loan agreement and that plaintiffs' issuance of a $20,000 check to him was repayment for services rendered, not a loan. At the non-jury trial, the check, in the sum of $20,000, was admitted into evidence, as was an "IOU," in the sum of $15,000, signed by plaintiffs in favor of defendant. The Civil Court awarded plaintiffs the principal sum of $5,000, representing the difference between the $20,000 check issued to defendant and the $15,000 "IOU" signed by plaintiffs for money owed to defendant. This appeal by defendant ensued.

The decision of a fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). Here, a fair interpretation of the documentary evidence submitted at trial supports the Civil Court's findings and conclusions. Accordingly, we find no basis to disturb the judgment.

Pesce, P.J., Golia and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: March 01, 2011

20110301

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.