ALLEN DAVIS v. LARST PEDERSEN et al.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-0669-05T30669-05T3

ALLEN DAVIS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

LARST PEDERSEN and

MARLENE PEDERSEN,

Defendants-Respondents.

_________________________________

 

Submitted May 3, 2006 - Decided June 5, 2006

Before Judges Stern and Alley.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Special Civil Part, Monmouth County, SC-3199-05.

Allen Davis, appellant, submitted a brief pro se.

Lars Pedersen and Marlene Pedersen, respondents, submitted a brief pro se.

PER CURIAM

Doctor Allen Davis, plaintiff, brings this action pro se against his patients, defendants Larst Pedersen and Marlene Pedersen. His contentions are made through the testimony of Carolee Brodie, plaintiff's current office manager. Brodie testified that there were discrepancies in patients' accounts due to the mistakes of plaintiff's previous office manager. Consequently, Brodie examined the records from 2002 through the time of her testimony in September 2005, to determine the amount of the billing errors for each of plaintiff's patients.

Defendant Marlene Pedersen also testified. Mrs. Pedersen testified that plaintiff contended she and her husband owed him $419 for services rendered. She stated that they paid $93 but plaintiff was demanding the remaining $325.80.

 
Based upon the proceedings before the trial court, judgment was appropriately entered in favor of defendants. The court found that the law of estoppel applied because it was too late to correct a bookkeeping mistake. The judge explained that a business may correct a billing error in a subsequent statement, but cannot seek to correct a bookkeeping error dating back three years. Accordingly, the judge entered a verdict of no cause for plaintiff. The factual record was concise, and there is no basis on which we can interfere with the judgment for defendants. See R. 2:10-2; R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(A); Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474, 484 (1974).

Affirmed.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-0669-05T3

June 5, 2006