Wright v. Connor — 228 A.D.2d 493

Majority

p. 493

Russell Wright et al., Respondents, v James F. Connor, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

[643 NYS2d 1002]

Contrary to the appellant’s contentions, the verdict of the Supreme Court finding liability premised on a theory of conversion was not against the weight of the evidence. A cause of action for conversion requires a showing that the defendant exercised unauthorized dominion over the plaintiffs’ property to the exclusion of the plaintiffs’ rights (see, Della Pietra v State of New York, 125 AD2d 936 , affd 71 NY2d 792 ; see also, Salt Springs Natl. Bank v Wheeler, 48 NY 492 , 495; AMF Inc. v Algo Distribs., 48 AD2d 352 , 356). The conflicting evidence presented a question of credibility which the fact-finder resolved in the plaintiffs’ favor (see, Buckenberger v Clark Constr. Corp., 208 AD2d 790 ; Stutman v Ortel, 150 AD2d 555 , 556; Pannetta v Ramo, 138 AD2d 686 , 687).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cases cited

Pietra v. State 125 AD2d 936 N.Y. App. Div. 1986-12-19 p. 493
Della Pietra v. State 71 NY2d 792 N.Y. 1988-06-09 p. 493
Salt Springs National Bank v. Wheeler 48 NY 492 N.Y. Comm'n App. at 495 p. 493
AMF Inc. v. Algo Distributors, Ltd. 48 AD2d 352 N.Y. App. Div. 1975-06-09 at 356 p. 493
Buckenberger v. C. Clark Construction Corp. 208 AD2d 790 N.Y. App. Div. 1994-10-24 p. 493
Stutman v. Ortel 150 AD2d 555 N.Y. App. Div. 1989-05-15 at 556 p. 493
Pannetta v. Ramo 138 AD2d 686 N.Y. App. Div. 1988-03-28 at 687 p. 493