Defendants appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered on or about June 18, 2010, after a nonjury trial, in favor of plaintiffs and awarding them damages.

Per Curiam.

Appeal from order (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered on or about June 18, 2010, deemed an appeal from the ensuing judgments (same court and Judge), each entered September 13, 2010, and so considered (see CPLR 5520[c]), judgments affirmed, with one bill of $25 costs, for the reasons stated in the bench decision of Arlene P. Bluth, J. at Civil Court. A fair interpretation of the evidence supports the trial court's findings regarding the existence of the parties' oral management agreement relating to the taxi medallions owned by plaintiffs, and the amounts due under the agreement. These findings, "which, given a contract that was oral, are largely based on witness credibility" (S & W Home Imp. Co. v La Casita II H.D.F.C., 66 AD3d 505, 506 [2009]), and entitled to deference on appeal (see Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495 [1992]). Nor is there merit to defendant's unpleaded statute of frauds defense since the agreement, by its terms, did not require performance beyond one year of its making (see General Obligations Law § 5—701[a][1]; Sheehy v Clifford Chance Rogers & Wells LLP, 3 NY3d 554 [2004]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: October 22, 2012