Summary
finding that plaintiff “failed to put forth any evidence, other than conclusory allegations, to substantiate her claim that she is entitled to reimbursement for money she allegedly gave the defendant toward the down payment and purchase of the property”
Summary of this case from Melnick v. PressOpinion
July 29, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
It is well settled that the determination of a Referee appointed to hear and report is entitled to great weight, particularly where conflicting testimony and matters of credibility are at issue, since the Referee, as the trier of fact, had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses and to observe them on the stand (see, Schwartz v. Meisner, 198 A.D.2d 634; Bellnier v. Bellnier, 158 A.D.2d 947, 948; Matter of Holy Spirit Assn. for Unification of World Christianity v. Tax Commn., 81 A.D.2d 64, 70; Maushart v. Kelly, 10 A.D.2d 635). Thus, the report and recommendation of a Referee should be confirmed if the findings in the report are supported by the record (see, Tai Wing Hong Importers v. King Realty Corp., 208 A.D.2d 710, 711).
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the court properly confirmed the Referee's report regarding the sale of the subject property and the division of the proceeds. The plaintiff failed to put forth any evidence, other than conclusory allegations, to substantiate her claim that she is entitled to reimbursement for money she allegedly gave the defendant toward the down payment and purchase of the property. Moreover, although a tenant in common may be allowed reimbursement for money expended in repairing and improving the property if the repairs and improvements were made in good faith and were necessary to protect or preserve the property (see, Worthing v. Cossar, 93 A.D.2d 515, 518), there is insufficient evidence in the record to support the plaintiff's claim for credits for various repairs and improvements (see, Wawrzusin v. Wawrzusin, 212 A.D.2d 779, 780).
We have examined the plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Joy, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.