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.

Abdul L. Munawar v. Mohamed Shehab Eldin

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts


January 14, 2013

ABDUL L. MUNAWAR,
RESPONDENT,
v.
MOHAMED SHEHAB ELDIN,
APPELLANT,
AND MANAL ISMAIL,
DEFENDANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Genine D. Edwards, J.), entered September 6, 2011.

Munawar v Eldin

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on January 14, 2013

PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., WESTON and ALIOTTA, JJ

The judgment, after a non-jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $7,610.81 as against defendant Mohamed Shehab Eldin.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, defendants' former landlord, commenced this action to recover rental arrears for July 2010 through November 2010, as well as for damage to the apartment. After a non-jury trial, the Civil Court awarded plaintiff judgment in the principal sum of $7,610.81, representing arrears for July 2010 through the time defendants vacated the premises in November 2010, and permitted plaintiff to keep the security deposit of $1,800 for property damage. Defendant Mohamed Shehab Eldin appeals from a judgment that was subsequently entered, awarding plaintiff the principal sum of $7,610.81 as against him.

Upon a review of the record, we find that the Civil Court properly found in favor of plaintiff as against defendant Mohamed Shehab Eldin. 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]). Furthermore, the determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]).

Here, the record shows that rent had not been paid from July through November 2010 and that there was property damage to the apartment. As the record supports the trial court's determination, we find no reason to disturb the judgment.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Pesce, P.J., Weston and Aliotta, JJ., concur. Decision Date: January 14, 2013

20130114

© 1992-2013 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.