1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 11 A.D.3d
  5. 11 A.D.3d 289 (2004)
 

SAPERSTEIN v. LEWENBERG

11 A.D.3d 289 (2004)

782 N.Y.S.2d 720

MICHAEL SAPERSTEIN, Appellant, v. ADAM LEWENBERG et al., Respondents.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

October 14, 2004.

A judgment rendered after a bench trial should not be disturbed unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions cannot be supported by any fair interpretation of the evidence, particularly where the credibility of witnesses is central to the case (Nightingale Rest. Corp. v Shak Food Corp., 155 A.D.2d 297 [1989], lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 702 [1990]). Review of the evidence reveals no basis for disturbing the court's findings....

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases