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.
Molly Hamilton, et al., respondents, v Lloyd Blackwood, appellant, et al., defendants.
Submitted—May 2, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to set aside a deed on the basis of fraud, the defendant Lloyd Blackwood appeals (1), as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered April 15, 2010, as, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against him in the principal sum of $97,653.42, and (2) from a supplemental judgment of the same court entered October 22, 2010, which directed him to “execute all documents necessary to effectuate transfer of title to [certain real property] to Palcynth Hamilton and Joseph Hamilton, as grantees.”
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
ORDERED that the supplemental judgment is affirmed; and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiffs.
“Where, as here, a case is tried without a jury, this Court's authority is as broad as that of the trial court, and this Court ‘may render the judgment it finds warranted by the facts, taking into account in a close case the fact that the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses,’ ” and hearing the testimony (MJAC Realty Corp. v. Boccio, 67 AD3d 870, 870, quoting Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 N.Y.2d 492, 499 [internal quotation marks omitted] ). Here the Supreme Court's determination, including its conclusion that the defendant Lloyd Blackwood was jointly and severally liable to the plaintiffs for monetary damages, was warranted by the facts adduced at trial. Moreover, the Supreme Court's determination “rest[ed] in large measure upon its assessment of the credibility of witnesses,” and we perceive no basis to disturb it (Terry v. State of New York, 39 AD3d 846, 846; see Elias v. Handler, 244 A.D.2d 522).
Blackwood's remaining claims either have been waived or are without merit (see U.S. Bank N.A. v. Eaddy, 79 AD3d 1022).
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., DICKERSON, BELEN and SGROI, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Docket No: 2010–04971 2010–10801 (Index No. 16969 /08)
Decided: June 28, 2011
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)