Opinion
May 1, 1997
Appeal from Surrogate's Court, Bronx County (Lee Holzman, S.).
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, affd 36 A.D.2d 793, lv denied 29 N.Y.2d 482) is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence in the record ( see, Thoreson v. Penthouse Intl., 80 N.Y.2d 490, 495). 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 without merit. Petitioners' argument for modification of that part of the decree favorable to appellant is not before us in the absence of a cross appeal ( see, Matter of Blue v. Wilkins, 71 A.D.2d 935).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.