Opinion
April 1, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Dickinson, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the Supreme Court that the evidence presented by the petitioner at the hearing failed to establish that he was the holder of one-half of all outstanding shares of Lake Mahopac Tailor, Inc., and therefore a proper party to petition for judicial dissolution of the corporation pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 1104 (see, Matter of Rappaport, 110 A.D.2d 639; Matter of Tavlin v. Nunsey Candlelight Corp., 69 A.D.2d 865). Accordingly, the proceeding was properly dismissed. Brown, J.P., Kooper, Harwood and Miller, JJ., concur.