From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ozkahveci v. Ozkahveci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 20, 1982
91 A.D.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

December 20, 1982


In a matrimonial action, defendant wife appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of divorce of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Derounian, J.), dated February 17, 1981, as dismissed her counterclaim to impose a constructive trust on the marital residence. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. The fourth conclusion of law is deleted. While we affirm the judgment insofar as appealed from, we believe it necessary to point out one error made by the trial court. The court's fourth conclusion of law states "[t]hat there is no corroborating documentary evidence to satisfy the Statute of Frauds with respect to the impression of a constructive trust on the marital premises by the defendant". Clearly this is a misstatement of law. The Statute of Frauds does not apply to a constructive trust because such a trust, by its very nature, does not require a writing (see Sharp v Kosmalski, 40 N.Y.2d 119; Crane v Crane, 77 A.D.2d 858; Tomaino v Tomaino, 68 A.D.2d 267). Bracken, J.P., Niehoff, Rubin and Boyers, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ozkahveci v. Ozkahveci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 20, 1982
91 A.D.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

Ozkahveci v. Ozkahveci

Case Details

Full title:JIRAYL OZKAHVECI, Also Known as JERRY OZKAHVECI, Respondent, v. LENY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 20, 1982

Citations

91 A.D.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Citing Cases

Vanasco v. Angiolelli

In an action to impress a constructive trust upon real property, the Statute of Frauds is not a defense. Such…

Marcoux v. Marcoux

In this regard, we find unpersuasive the defendant's contention that he was not required to assert the…