Opinion
2002-05831
Argued September 30, 2003.
October 27, 2003.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of an alleged escrow agreement, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Sherwood, J.), entered March 1, 2002, as, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint.
Sol Mermelstein, Brooklyn, N.Y. (S. Herman Klarsfeld of counsel), for appellants.
Tracy Edwards (Seligson, Rothman Rothman, New York, N.Y. [Martin S. Rothman and Alyne I. Diamond] of counsel), for respondents.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The determination of a trial court after a nonjury trial should not be disturbed on appeal unless it could not have been reached upon any fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Thoreson v. Penthouse Intl., 80 N.Y.2d 490, 495; Kaniklidis v. 235 Lincoln Place Hous. Corp., 305 A.D.2d 546, 547). The evidence, fairly interpreted, supports a finding that the purported escrow agreement was never communicated to the defendants and thus the defendants never undertook the obligations contained therein ( see Farago v. Burke, 262 N.Y. 229, 233; Shapiro v. Snow Becker Krauss, 208 A.D.2d 461; Grossman v. Fieland, 107 A.D.2d 659, 660). Accordingly, the complaint was properly dismissed.
In light of our determination, we need not reach the defendants' alternative argument in support of affirmance.
RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.