It has long been the settled law that on a bench trial, the decision of the trial court is to be given great deference, and should not be disturbed on appeal “unless it is obvious that the court’s conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence, especially when the findings of fact rest in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses.”1 This rule applies in non-primary residence proceedings.2 In 409-411 Sixth Street v. Mogi,3 however, a three-judge majority of the Appellate Division, First Department, in reversing the Appellate Term and dismissing the landlord’s non-primary residence holdover proceeding, appears not to have applied this well-established standard of review, and instead made its own findings based on an independent analysis of the evidence.
To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.
Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.
ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at email@example.com