Opinion
03-14-2024
LEHMAN BROTHERS INTERNATIONAL (EUROPE) (in Administration), Plaintiff–Appellant, v. AG FINANCIAL PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant–Respondent.
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, New York (Andrew J, Rossman of counsel), for appellant. Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York (Roger A. Cooper of counsel), for respondent.
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, New York (Andrew J, Rossman of counsel), for appellant.
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York (Roger A. Cooper of counsel), for respondent.
Webber, J.P., Oing, González, Kennedy, Shulman, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Melissa A. Crane, J.), entered June 30, 2023, dismissing plaintiff's remaining cause of action after a bench trial and awarding defendant/counterclaim plaintiff $20,663,300.20, plus interest, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
We affirm for the reasons set forth in Supreme Court’s well-reasoned decision.
"In a nonjury trial, the decision of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that the court’s conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence" (Watts v. State of New York, 25 A.D.3d 324, 809 N.Y.S.2d 5 [1st Dept. 2006] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Here, there is no basis to disturb the trial court’s determination, which is based upon its resolution of conflicting expert testimony.
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments, including that the trial court’s decision after trial is inconsistent with our decision on summary judgment (see 168 A.D.3d 527, 90 N.Y.S.3d 530 [1st Dept. 2019]), and find them unavailing.