Case Name: Jack Sobel, as the Sole Surviving General Partner of Great River Country Club Associates, Respondent-Appellant, v. John Bess et al., Appellants-Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1978-03-21
Citations: 43 N.Y.2d 969
Docket Number: 
Parties: Jack Sobel, as the Sole Surviving General Partner of Great River Country Club Associates, Respondent-Appellant, v John Bess et al., Appellants-Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 43
Pages: 969–972

Head Matter:
Jack Sobel, as the Sole Surviving General Partner of Great River Country Club Associates, Respondent-Appellant, v John Bess et al., Appellants-Respondents.
Argued February 9, 1978;
decided March 21, 1978
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
John M. Delehanty, Jack C. Auspitz and Barrington D. Parker\ Jr., for appellants-respondents.
Jacob Oliner for respondent-appellant.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
On the first appeal, the Appellate Division concluded that the settlement agreement reached by the parties was equivocal in its written form and referred the case to Mr. Justice David L. Glickman for clarification (43 AD2d 733). Judge Glickman, before whom the original stipulation of settlement had been made, after receiving extensive testimony interpreted the settlement agreement in a carefully considered opinion. Our examination of the record discloses substantial evidence to support his interpretation. We find insufficient warrant in law for the subsequent excision and reversal by the Appellate Division. If its decision be perceived as a factual determination we are persuaded that the decision of Mr. Justice Glickman more nearly conforms to the weight of the evidence in this case (Schine v Schine, 31 NY2d 113; Matter of City of New York [Boston-Secor Houses—Rusciano], 25 NY2d 430, 432).
Accordingly, on defendants' appeal, judgment appealed from and Appellate Division order thereby brought up for review, reversed, with costs to defendants, and the order of Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated October 8, 1974 reinstated. On plaintiffs cross appeal order, insofar as appealed from, affirmed; question certified, insofar as applicable to plaintiffs appeal, answered in the affirmative.