Estate of Cavallo, Matter of

• Decision Date: 08 May 1997
• Citation: Estate of Cavallo, Matter of, 657 N.Y.S.2d 897, 239 A.D.2d 187 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
• Parties: In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Ralph CAVALLO, Deceased. Jean Cavallo et al., Respondents; The Davenport Neck Corporation, Respondent-Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 897

657 N.Y.S.2d 897

239 A.D.2d 187

In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Ralph CAVALLO, DeceasedJean Cavallo et al., RespondentsThe Davenport Neck Corporation, Respondent-Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division First Department.

May 8, 1997.

Sabino J. Berardino, for Petitioners-Respondents.

John S. Kommer, for Respondent-Appellant.

Decree, Surrogate's Court, Bronx County(Lee Holzman, S.), entered April 17, 1996, which, to the extent appealed from, after a nonjury trial, directed that respondent-appellant register on its books 21 shares of its capital stock to petitioners within five days of delivery of the necessary documentation, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The Surrogate's conclusion that, at the time of the subject transfers, there was no valid and consistently applied restriction on transfer (compare, Glens Falls Ins. Co. v. National Bd. of Fire Underwriters Bldg. Corp., 63 Misc.2d 989, 990-992, 314 N.Y.S.2d 80, affd.36 A.D.2d 793, 318 N.Y.S.2d 915, lv. denied29 N.Y.2d 482, 324 N.Y.S.2d 1027, 273 N.E.2d 575) is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence in the record (see, Thoreson v. Penthouse Intl., 80 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 591 N.Y.S.2d 978, 606 N.E.2d 1369).The Surrogate properly rejected the argument that a later-enacted restriction should be applied retroactively.We have considered appellant's remaining arguments and find them to be...