Dunmore

BACKGROUND

The nature of the contention raised in this appeal does not require a detailed recitation of the evidence adduced at trial. It will suffice to note that plaintiff’s expert in signature authentication, David Moore, testified to examining over 100 promissory notes, loan guarantees, and other financial instruments purporting to contain the signatures of George and/or Ruth Dunmore. With respect to 126 such documents, Moore definitively concluded that only one signature purporting to be that of George Dunmore was a genuine signature while the others were signed by someone else “try[ing] to mimic or simulate his signature.” None of the signatures purporting to be that of Ruth Dunmore were genuine signatures. With respect to two additional documents, Moore concluded the signatures for George and Ruth Dunmore were “very probably not genuine.”

1 Plaintiff represented himself at trial. Additional defendants named in plaintiff’s operative complaint were voluntarily dismissed prior to trial.

2 Moore’s testimony in this regard was not challenged at trial. Instead, in a declaration submitted in support of a summary judgment motion, which was admitted into evidence at trial at…