Facts:

• Shulman and Wilson claimed a trust agreement existed with Perepolkin, under which Perepolkin held a property in trust for them.
• Discrepancies and inconsistencies in the evidence regarding the existence and terms of the alleged trust.
• The property was never transferred to a company as initially planned, and the company was eventually dissolved.

Issue:

• Whether an express trust was created at the time the property was transferred to Perepolkin, based on a "handshake deal."

Court's Ruling:

• The court concluded that the plaintiffs failed to establish that an express trust was created on the terms asserted.
• The evidence did not provide clarity or consistency regarding the creation and terms of the alleged trust.
• The action was dismissed, and Shulman was ordered to deliver up vacant possession of the property within 30 days of the court’s order.

Costs/Damages:

• Perepolkin was entitled to his costs at Scale B.