Opinion
March 2, 2000
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered July 2, 1999, which, after a nonjury trial, declared that defendants own a certain restaurant subject to a constructive trust in plaintiff's favor for a one-third interest in the business and that plaintiff's claim for an accounting should be heard by a Judicial Hearing Officer, and order, same court and Justice, entered August 4, 1999, appointing a receiver for the subject restaurant, with related relief, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
James Andres, for Plaintiff-Respondent.
Mark D. Herman, for Defendants-Appellants.
NARDELLI, J.P., TOM, LERNER, RUBIN, FRIEDMAN, JJ.
The trial court's essential factual conclusions are sufficiently supported by reliable evidence (see, Daley v. Related Cos., Inc., 236 A.D.2d 340, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 803). Defendants' factual contentions amount to nothing more than a self-serving view of the evidence and, as such, afford "no reason to disturb" the trial court's findings (see, Castillo v. New York City Hous. Auth., 266 A.D.2d 55, 698 N.Y.S.2d 460). Plaintiff proved a sufficiently definite oral joint venture agreement (see, Roper v. Heller-Miller Realty Corp., 167 A.D.2d 457), and the circumstances of this case justified imposition of a constructive trust. The appointment of a receiver constituted a provident exercise of discretion (see, Rosan v. Vassell, 257 A.D.2d 436, 437). We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.