Fraser v. Bascombe

Fraser v Bascombe 2024 NY Slip Op 31992(U) June 4, 2024 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: Index No. 523155/2022 Judge: Peter P. Sweeney Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/07/2024 INDEX NO. 523155/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/10/2024

SUPREME COURT OFTHE S ATEOFNEWY0RK Index .. . No.: . . 523155/2022 . .

COUNTY OF KINGS; PART7• Motion Date: 5~20~24 ------. --- . --------------------------- ----------------------- --- ·-X Mot Seq, No.: 1 TERRENCE FRASER,

Plaintiff. -against- DECISION/ORDER

NICOLE BASCOMBE, TYRE WILSON & HEATHER WILSON,

Defendants: ------------- ··--------------·-------- -- ·-- ·----------------·-----X Thefollowing papers, \V ich are e-filed with NYC::.EF as items I 4-3 7, vvere read on this motion:.

In this action to qi.iiet titl~ to teal property located at62 Foui1tairt Avenuc .. Brooklyn, New ' .

York; Heather Wilson seeks a pfeliminary injunction. Pending thetesolution: of the action, she ' seeks to enjoin the plaintiff Tertjcnce Fraserfrom: i I i

I (a) perfoni1ing or continuing to pctform any v.'ork to a:lter, construct, dcntolish; destroy,. encl*11 bet, modify, renovate; or repair of any kind on or at the premises, i11c~uding any such work to the bu~lding, fixtures, and~or appm1enance~ at the Property; absent the written consent of Defendant .Heather . . Wilsbn. ····I .· ! (b) demolishing, !destroying, discarding, or removing any of the Defendant H~ather Wilson's documents, personal property, or .other items sfored at th!;! Property, including property belonging to Dcfet1dantlHeathcr Wilsonis mother, Norma \\'ilson, and i (c) impeding, rdtricting, or restraining Defendant Heather Wilson's acc4ss to, or use and occupancy of, any portion of the Ptoperty. !

Background: i . I Heather Wils011.. a deientiant . I in . this action. . . claims . . that her mother, . . .Norma Wilson . . and . the . plai nti ff1 Terrence Fraser, her 1~other' s cousin, purchased the real property at issue in th i,s action . . If . . . ii1 1985. Heather claims that "vlile the Deed dated May 29, 1985, lists only tht! plaintiffas a !

"'' ,, ' .. L...... .

1 of 5 [* 1]

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/07/2024 INDEX NO. 523155/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/10/2024

grantee, her mother contributed o the purchase :price of the prope1ty as a coequal owner.

Heather claims that around the t me ofpurchase, that in order to documet1thcr mothe(s

ownership stake in the property, plaintiff had his lawyer send a letter to her mother on August

22, 1985. The letter states as follows: II Dear Ms. Wilson!: I This is to confir~ that as.of the date.listed above, August 22, 1985, you shar~ ari intetestiii the o,,-11er_ship and equity associated with the premises kllQ}Vn as 62 Fountam Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, with my client Terrence Fraser. You have all the normal interests associated wit~ t]~e O\.i.'ner.ship of this p1·01Jerty frorn this poii1t forward and said 111terest1s non-revocable.

The letter is \Vrit1.en pursuant to the express authorization of Terrence Fraser. Very truly yours, i /s ! CHARLES M. POWELL, JR. ! AGREED TO AJ}JD ACCEPTED:

Is 'I --w-· -~ ·~----~-~~-w~J~· 1 · ~-·--~-M~--~· -- NORMA WILSQN i Is .\ -------------~ -----,----------.------ .

TERRENCE FM.SER

' A copy or the letter is aiincxed ~s an exhibit to the motion i I i I . . . Heather claims that she ind her mother contributed to the household expenses at all relevanttimes~ Heather has beeklivingthere for four decades. NomiaWilsonpassed away 011 . . . . . . 'I April ZO; 202.0. Heather c,laiin tµat a portion oJher mother;s in,terest in th~ property passed to 'I . . her upon her death. Nt:Yrma's o~er heirs signed .s deed ort Jmi.e 1, 2022, granting to Heather all their interest in th~ pi"ope1ty.. I I I

.²

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/07/2024 INDEX NO. 523155/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/10/2024

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/07/2024 INDEX NO. 523155/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/10/2024

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/07/2024 INDEX NO. 523155/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/10/2024

Footnotes

[2] of 5 [* 2] In response to the actio1~, Heather interposed an ans'i..ver asserting counterclaims, including acount~rc],aim aUcgiI gthat.her mother obtained an ownership interest in the property pursuant to the pnnc1ples ofco strnct1ve trust According to Heather, tJc plaintiff is i10w attempting to perform construction on the first floor, in the area where she live , without hcrpennissio11. This prompted this motion. Discussion: The decision to grant a reliminazy injunction is a matter committed to the sound discretion oftheco11rt ·(Nelson. . l..P. I v. Ja,mace. 248 A.D.2d 448,. 448-449,. 668 N.YS.2d 936:. see Doe\'.. Axelrod. 73 N.Y.2d ?48, 750 1 536 N.Y.S.2d 44, 532 N.E.2d 1272; Automated fVastc 'f b1c_... ~o I . Disposal. Inc. "·. A1id--Hudson ~1st~,. A._D.3d 1072) l 073, 857 N.Y.~.2d 648). In or~~r to demonstrate entitlement to a pre1hmmary mJunctton, the movant must estabhsh ( 1) a probab1hty of success on the merits,. (2) . the!danget . ! of irreparable . han11 in the absei1Ce of injunctive relief,· and (3) a balance ofthe eq uitiesi in favor ofthe movant (see lvfalter ofAdvcmcccl Digital Sec, Solutions, Inc; v: Samsung Tech~Fin Co .. Ltd., 53 A.D.Jd 612, 6J3, 862 N.Y.S.2d 551; /vlonh/1/k-., i Sfr.1r1s. Realty Gi·oup v. Deep Sfa Yacht & RacquetC!ub, 111 A.D.2d 909,910,491 N.Y.S.2d 32). A court evaluating a motio4 for a preliminary injllllctionmust be mindful that 'Tt]he purpose ofa preliminary injunction istolmaintain the status quo, not to detem1inethe ultimate rights of . i the parties'' . (AfCltter qf. WheaMn.fTMWFow·th ! Ave., LP v. Ne1v York City Dept: qfBldgs.. 65 A.D.3d 1051, 1052,886N.Y.S.fd41;seeCoi,mwL'h CmjJ. 1•. AlleyPondOinwrs Corp., 25 . .. . i . . . A.D3·d 642,643,808 N.Y.S.2di418). . . . . j i ! With respectto the issue! of whether the defendant established a probability of success on I the merits of her claim ofconstftuctivetrust, ''[a] constructive trust is the formula through which . ! . the consciertceofeq1.1ity finds e¾prcssion'' (Toobian , .. Golzad, 193 AD.3d 778,. 781, 147 I N.Y.S.3d 61 [intenJal . quotationimarks I on1ittedJ; see Reingold v. !Jowins, 1.8.0 A.DJ.cl at 724, 119 N.Y.S.3d487). . "When . I . been acquired. in . such circum!ltances that the h9lder of the_ propertylhas . legal tit.le may not in good cons¢ience retain the. beneficial interest,. equity converts him [or herJ I into a trustee'; (Toohian v. GoizJ1d, 193 AD.Jd at 781, l47N. Y.S.3d 61 [internal quotation . i . . hi.ai"ks .omitted]). "[S] ince it is a~ equitable remedy;· a constructive trust is 11ecessarily tlexi b le to I • I ' ·-· .. -·······f·"····

[3] of 5 [* 3] accomplish its purpose" (To'ohifn v. Gohad, 193 A.D.3d at· 781, 147 N. Y.S.3d 61 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see1{aprov v. S'tafinsky. 145 A.D.3d 869, 871---'872, 44 N.Y.S.Jd 123). I In general, to impose . a I!constructive trµst, four . factors must be established: (1).. a confidential o(fiduciary. relati~hship, r . (2) a promise, . (3) a transfer in reliance thereon, and (4) unjust enrichment (seeShorp t· Kosmolski, 40 N.Y.2d at 121,386 N.Y.S.2d 72,351 N.E.2d 721). ~owever, asth.ese elements sirve only as aguide'.ine, a const.ructive tru~t may stiU be imposed even 1f all of the e!emtents are not e$tabl1shed (see Simonds v. S1mondsi 45 N.Y.2d at 241,408 N.Y.S.2d 359,380 N.E. d 189; Marini v. Lombardo, 79 A.D.3d 932,933,912 N.Y.S.2d 693). Here, the Com1 finds th t the defendant satisfiedher burden of demonstrating by clear and co11v'incing evidence that h,r inother acquired title to the property pui'suant to principle of constructive, Clearly, asfarnili~l I relatives, Norma Wilson . and.the·plaintiff shared a confidential relationship (see Broderson v, 1arsons, 106 A.D.3d 677,679,964 N.Y.S.2d 259; Reiner v. Reine,·, 100 A.D.2d 872; 874. 4~4 N. Y.S.2d 538} Sufficient evidence \Vas adduced that the i ,vhi le the subject prnperty was ~itled in plaintiffs name, Norma \Vil son expended her own money in order to purchase the ~ubj ect property in reliance upon an understanding that she would have a non-:-tevocable oJnership interest in the premises. \Vhile the letter from plaintiffs i . attorneyto Norma . Wilsoi1 does !not r demonstrate . the existence of a promise . that the plaintiff ,vould transfer a portion ofthe 4wnership ofthe· property tp.her upon request, it is consistent with i such a promise and in the Coi1rtj's. view. serves .as a sufficient predicate for the imposition ofa . I . . constructive trust. Finally, the ewidence: demonstrated thatthe defendant would be unjustly enriched by retaining, sole legal title (see id.: cj.' Brodersonv. Parsom. 106 A.D.3d at 679, 964 N. Y,S.2d 259). i 'i ! The defendant also met her burden cif dcrnonstrating that the danger of irreparable harm ! .in the absencG of injuncti verel itr, and a balart~' Wtli'o~ in her favoL For the ahqve reasons, defertdan:t; s .motio 11 for Ia 11re lim inary I L.i ut-·y. is granted. Per'!.ding further order of the .,...;.,._.w ......... - ~.. - .....· .· Court, the plaintiff is enjoinGd from: I 4

[4] of 5 [* 4] (a) perfom1ing r continuing to perform any work to alter, construct, de olish, destroy, encumber, modify. reno ate , or repair of any kind on or at the premises, including any such work to the uilding, fixtures. and/or appurtenances at the Property, ab ent the written consent of Defendant Heather Wilson, (b) demolishing destroying. di card ing, or removing any of the Defendant H ather Wilson's documents, personal property , or other items sored at the Property, including property b longing to Defendan Heather Wilson's mother. orma Wilson, and (c) imped ing, re tricting or restra in ing Defendant Heather Wi !son's ace ss to or use and occupancy of, any portion of the Property. Defendant is directed to post an undertaking in the amount of $ 1 000.00 within 30 days of this order. Accordingly , it is hereb ,-..: =, ORDRED that the moti n is dec ided as set forth above. -- L. r: This constitutes the deci ion and order of the Court. ' --.l I . ,-, _, _ _,_ Dated: June 4, 2024 C) ..r::- 0 PETER P. SWEENEY, J.S.C. ate: T hi s signature was generated electronically pursuant to Administrative Order 86/20 dated April 20, 2020 5

[5] of 5 [* 5]