Legal Opinion

Niemira v. Dean

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 31, 1997PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The parties’ conflicting accounts of the *1069terms of the oral agreement raised questions of fact for Supreme Court to resolve. “On a bench trial, the decision of the 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, especially when the findings of fact rest in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses (Nightingale Rest. Corp. v Shak Food Corp., 155 AD2d 297 [, lv denied 76 NY2d 702])”…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Claridge Gardens, Inc. v. MenottiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  2. Nightingale Restaurant Corp. v. Shak Food Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Carney v. DavignonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  2. Pues Family Trust Ira Ex Rel. Pues v. Parnas Holdings Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
  3. MacCasland v. MandaraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  4. Virtuoso v. Pepsi-Cola Laurel Bottling Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API