Richstone v. Q-Med, Inc., Q-ME

Decision Date01 October 1992
Docket NumberQ-ME,INC
Citation588 N.Y.S.2d 772,186 A.D.2d 354
PartiesGeoffrey RICHSTONE, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v., Defendant-Respondent, Schneider & Sommer, Defendant, Leonard Malin, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Burton Sherman, J.), entered October 22, 1991, which, after a non-jury trial, dismissed the amended complaint as against the defendants, on the merits, with prejudice, unanimously affirmed, with costs. In the underlying action for inter alia, negligence, conversion and breach of contract, plaintiff seeks monetary damages allegedly sustained as a result of the allegedly unauthorized sale of twenty thousand shares of publicly traded common stock which had been issued to the plaintiff. Upon review of a bench trial, the findings of fact should be viewed in a light most favorable to sustain the judgment, due deference should be accorded Trial Term in matters of credibility, and the findings of fact should not be disturbed unless such determination could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence. (Nightingale Rest. Corp. v. Shak Food Corp., 155 A.D.2d 297, 547 N.Y.S.2d 61, lv. denied, 76 N.Y.2d 702, 558 N.Y.S.2d 891, 557 N.E.2d 1187). Applying the foregoing principles, we find that the determination of the trial court, which had the opportunity to hear the conflicting testimony and evaluate the demeanor of the witnesses on cross-examination, that the plaintiff had, in fact, authorized defendant Malin as his designated agent for the sale and transfer of the stock certificates and that the endorsement on the stock certificates and the notarized authorization of the plaintiff to Dean Witter were not forgeries, was supported by the evidence presented at trial. Plaintiff has, therefore, failed to demonstrate on appeal that the trial court's determination, was not supported by any fair interpretation of the evidence. Similarly, in light of the foregoing, plaintiff's claims against defendants Dean Witter and Q-Med, Inc. are similarly without merit. We have reviewed the plaintiff's remaining claims and find them to be without merit..

SULLIVAN, J.P., and MILONAS, ELLERIN and KASSAL, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • In re Auth.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 21, 2011
    ...unless such determination could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence” ( Richstone v. Q–Med, Inc., 186 A.D.2d 354, 354, 588 N.Y.S.2d 772 [1992]; see Thoreson v. Penthouse Intl., 80 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 591 N.Y.S.2d 978, 606 N.E.2d 1369 [1992]; Horsford v. Bacott, 3......
  • People v. Allen
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • October 21, 2021
    ...of business. The court's finding of fraud was not against the weight of the evidence (see generally Richstone v. Q–Med, Inc., 186 A.D.2d 354, 588 N.Y.S.2d 772 [1st Dept. 1992] ). For example, the court found, "Allen's appropriation of $3.4 million of carried interest was procured by the fra......
  • People v. Allen
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • October 21, 2021
    ... ... the evidence (see generally Richstone v Q-Med, Inc., ... 186 A.D.2d 354 [1st Dept 1992]). For example, the ... ...
  • Keogh v. Connolly
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • January 14, 1997
    ...of the three subject private not-for-profit corporations was properly adopted by the Corporations and was valid (see, Richstone v. Q-Med., 186 A.D.2d 354, 588 N.Y.S.2d 772; Soam Corp. v. Trane Co., 202 A.D.2d 162, 163, 608 N.Y.S.2d 177, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 758, 615 N.Y.S.2d 875, 639 N.E.2d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT