From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCall v. Town of Middlebury

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 9, 1976
52 A.D.2d 736 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Opinion

April 9, 1976

Appeal from the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Present — Marsh, P.J., Cardamone, Simons, Mahoney and Witmer, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiffs appeal from judgment, after trial without a jury, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint in an action for a judgment, pursuant to subdivision 1 of section 205 High. of the Highway Law, declaring abandoned a certain portion of the town highway abutting plaintiffs' premises. The trial court factually determined that the disputed portion of the town highway here in issue had not been abandoned within the meaning of section 205 High. of the Highway Law. In urging reversal, plaintiffs contend that such determination was against the weight of the evidence. Our function in appellate review is to determine whether there is credible proof in the record to sustain the findings and conclusion of the trial court. In such review the record proof is to be given a view most favorable to sustain the judgment (Van Roo v Van Roo, 268 App. Div. 170, 172, affd 294 N.Y. 731). In addition, when, as here, the truth hinges upon the credibility of the witnesses, the trial court's observation advantage is to be given deference and its determination should be given great weight (Amend v Hurley, 293 N.Y. 587, 594; Brunstein v Brunstein, 273 App. Div. 847). Further, we should not disturb the findings of the court as the trier of the facts unless its conclusion could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (Billington v State of New York, 33 A.D.2d 822, 823; Loeb v Dry Dock Sav. Bank, 4 A.D.2d 190, 191, affd 4 N.Y.2d 810). In view of the diametrically opposed testimony concerning the use and activity involving the portion of the town road here in issue, the credibility of the respective witnesses becomes determinative. Trial court's decision implicitly resolved such issue of credibility adversely to the plaintiffs. An analysis of the defendants' evidence, viewed in its most favorable light, amply sustains the trial court's findings and determination of nonabandonment within the context of subdivision 1 of section 205 High. of the Highway Law.


Summaries of

McCall v. Town of Middlebury

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 9, 1976
52 A.D.2d 736 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)
Case details for

McCall v. Town of Middlebury

Case Details

Full title:ALAN R. McCALL et al., Appellants v. TOWN OF MIDDLEBURY et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Apr 9, 1976

Citations

52 A.D.2d 736 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Citing Cases

Woodruff v. Castaldo

The Referee found that specific deviations and omissions in the electrical system, mechanical specifications,…

Wells Fargo Bank Int'l v. Binabdulaziz

05), or that it was made without a fair consideration. Moreover, plaintiff did not establish that the…