Liu v. Chen

Kevin Kerveng Tung, P.C., Flushing, N.Y. (Ge Liof counsel), for appellant.

Steven T. Gee, P.C., New York, N.Y., for respondent.

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for ejectment, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Yablon, Ct.Atty.Ref.), dated October 22, 2013, as, after a nonjury trial, awarded judgment in favor of the defendant Al Ming Chen on her counterclaim to impose a constructive trust on the subject real property.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In reviewing a determination made after a nonjury trial, the power of this Court is as broad as that of the trial court, and this Court may render the judgment

it finds “warranted by the facts,” bearing in mind that in a close case, the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses and hearing the testimony ( Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v. Town of Bedford,60 N.Y.2d 492, 499, 470 N.Y.S.2d 350, 458 N.E.2d 809; see Diaz v. Diaz,130 A.D.3d 560, 562, 13 N.Y.S.3d 455; Matter of Breslin v. Superior Steakhouse Sys. Holding Corp.,124 A.D.3d 771, 773, 2 N.Y.S.3d 191). “ ‘Where the findings of fact rest in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses, deference is owed to the trial court's credibility determinations' ” ( Papovitch v. Papovitch,84 A.D.3d 1045, 1046, 923 N.Y.S.2d 209, quoting Praimnath v. Torres,59 A.D.3d 419, 419–420, 873 N.Y.S.2d 133; see Zwarycz v. Marnia Constr., Inc.,130 A.D.3d 922, 923, 15 N.Y.S.3d 86).

“Generally, a constructive trust may be imposed ‘when property has been acquired in such circumstances that the holder of the legal title may not in good conscience retain the beneficial interest’ ” (Sharp v. Kosmalski,40 N.Y.2d 119, 121, 386 N.Y.S.2d 72, 351 N.E.2d 721, quoting Beatty v. Guggenheim Exploration Co.,225 N.Y. 380, 386, 122 N.E. 378; see Diaz v. Diaz,130 A.D.3d at 561, 13 N.Y.S.3d 455). “The elements of a constructive trust are (1) a fiduciary or confidential relationship; (2) an express or implied promise; (3) a transfer in reliance on the promise; and (4) unjust enrichment” (Diaz v.

Diaz,130 A.D.3d at 561, 13 N.Y.S.3d 455; see Sharp v. Kosmalski,40 N.Y.2d at 121, 386 N.Y.S.2d 72, 351 N.E.2d 721). While these factors are useful in many cases, the constructive trust doctrine is not rigidly limited ( see Simonds v. Simonds,45 N.Y.2d 233, 241, 408 N.Y.S.2d 359, 380 N.E.2d 189; Matter of Harold,112 A.D.3d 929, 931, 979 N.Y.S.2d 334). Thus, although the elements of a constructive trust must be proved by clear and convincing evidence ( see Diaz v. Diaz,130 A.D.3d at 561, 13 N.Y.S.3d 455), “[t]he constructive trust doctrine is given broad scope to respond to all human implications of a transaction in order to give expression to the conscience of equity and to satisfy the demands of justice” ( Iwanow v. Iwanow,39 A.D.3d 476, 477, 834 N.Y.S.2d 251; see Simonds v. Simonds,45 N.Y.2d at 241, 408 N.Y.S.2d 359, 380 N.E.2d 189; Sharp v. Kosmalski,40 N.Y.2d at 123, 386 N.Y.S.2d 72, 351 N.E.2d 721).

Here, the Supreme Court properly awarded judgment in favor of the defendant Al Ming Chen on her counterclaim to impose a constructive trust on the subject real property. Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, Chen offered evidence satisfying the elements generally needed for the imposition of a constructive trust. The plaintiff's contention that Chen never had any interest in the subject property, and therefore is not entitled to the imposition of a constructive trust, is without merit. Chen showed that she contributed money for the purchase of the subject property and for paying down the mortgage in reliance on an implied promise by the plaintiff that she shared an interest in the property (see Diaz v. Diaz,130 A.D.3d at 561, 13 N.Y.S.3d 455; Rock v. Rock,100 A.D.3d 614, 616, 953 N.Y.S.2d 165; Moak v. Raynor,28 A.D.3d 900, 902, 814 N.Y.S.2d 289). Moreover, Chen demonstrated that a constructive trust is necessary in this case to satisfy the demands of justice (see Simonds v. Simonds,45 N.Y.2d at 241, 408 N.Y.S.2d 359, 380 N.E.2d 189).