Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
George Henry BRYANT, etc., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Dennis BRYANT, Defendant-Appellant.
Decree, Surrogate's Court, Bronx County (Lee L. Holzman, S.), entered January 18, 2008, which, after a nonjury trial in an action to set aside a deed, declared the New York deed at issue null and void and cancelled the deed, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from decision, same court and Surrogate, entered on or about January 18, 2008, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable paper.
Plaintiff demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the New York deed purportedly conveying the decedent's (the parties' mother) interest in property to defendant was a forgery (see Albany County Sav. Bank v. McCarty, 149 N.Y. 71, 80, 43 N.E. 427 [1896]; Son Fong Lum v. Antonelli, 102 A.D.2d 258, 260-261, 476 N.Y.S.2d 921 [1984], affd. 64 N.Y.2d 1158, 490 N.Y.S.2d 733, 480 N.E.2d 347 [1985]; see also Winfield Capital Corp. v. Green Point Sav. Bank, 261 A.D.2d 539, 540-541, 690 N.Y.S.2d 625 [1999] ). Indeed, plaintiff's forensic document expert presented detailed testimony explaining that the signature on the subject deed was not made by the same writer as those on the exemplars in evidence. The court was presented with further testimony and documentary evidence indicating that the deed was not legitimately executed, acknowledged, and delivered. There exists no basis to disturb the court's credibility determinations (see e.g. Saperstein v. Lewenberg, 11 A.D.3d 289, 782 N.Y.S.2d 720 [2004] ).
We have considered defendant's remaining contentions, including that plaintiff failed to produce a material witness, and find them unavailing.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: January 15, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)