Carvajal v Selechnik

Annotate this Case
[*1] Carvajal v Selechnik 2015 NY Slip Op 50971(U) Decided on June 30, 2015 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on June 30, 2015
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Schoenfeld, J.P., Hunter, Jr., Ling-Cohan, JJ.
570798/14

Bernarda Carvajal, Plaintiff-Respondent,

against

Jacob Selechnik a/k/a 3525 Decatur Avenue LLC, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Donald A. Miles, J.), entered March 19, 2014, after a nonjury trial, in favor of plaintiff and awarding her damages in the principal sum of $9,206.56.

Per Curiam.

Judgment (Donald A. Miles, J.), entered March 19, 2014, affirmed, without costs.

On a nonjury trial, the decision of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed unless the court's conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495 [1992]). Applying that standard of review here, we sustain the court's liability determination in this action seeking damages arising from a bedbug infestation in plaintiff's apartment. The trial court, as factfinder, was warranted in finding that defendant was partially liable for plaintiff's damaged furniture due to its failure to "timely eradicate said infestation." Insofar as defendant argues that plaintiff's remedy for the bedbug infestation should be limited to damages arising from a breach of the warranty of habitability, this contention is without merit (see Bour v 259 Bleeker LLC., 104 AD3d 454 [2013]; Grogan v Gamber Corp., 19 Misc 3d 798 [Sup Ct, NY Co 2008, Gische, J.]).

We are unable to render an informed decision on the merits of defendant's claim that plaintiff failed to adduce competent evidence of damages, inasmuch as defendant, as appellant, failed to meet its obligation to assemble a proper record on appeal (see Sebag v Narvaez, 60 AD3d 485 [2009]), including the receipts presented by plaintiff to establish the value of her damaged property (see Taylor v Taylor, 123 AD3d 693 [2014]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: June 30, 2015

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.