Oparaji v Pep Boys

[*1] Oparaji v Pep Boys 2004 NY Slip Op 51626(U) Decided on December 14, 2004 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on December 14, 2004
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., PATTERSON and RIOS, JJ.
2004-402 Q C

MAURICE OPARAJI, JR., Appellant,

against

PEP BOYS, ASHOOK RAMROOP and DERROL GREENIDGE, Respondents.

Appeal by plaintiff from a small claims judgment of the Civil Court, Queens County (K. Kerrigan, J.), entered May 12, 2003, in favor of defendants dismissing the action.

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action for defective repairs, plaintiff failed to present competent evidence establishing his claim. In addition, the court, after hearing the testimony, found the testimony of the manager of Pep Boys, to the effect that plaintiff authorized the repairs, to be credible. Moreover, although the individual defendants did not appear at trial, there was no evidence establishing any liability as to them. Plaintiff's claim that the corporate defendant was required to be represented by an attorney is also without merit. Section 1809 of the New York City Civil Court Act provides that an authorized employee may defend a small claims action on behalf of a corporate defendant. In view of the foregoing and upon review of the record, we find that substantial justice was done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law (CCA 1807).
Decision Date: December 14, 2004