Window Treatment Designers, Inc. v Dalipi

[*1] Window Treatment Designers, Inc. v Dalipi 2009 NY Slip Op 50809(U) [23 Misc 3d 135(A)] Decided on April 24, 2009 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 April 24, 2009
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : RUDOLPH, P.J., TANENBAUM and MOLIA, JJ
2008-445 N C.

Window Treatment Designers, Inc. d/b/a THE SHADE FACTORY, Appellant,

against

Tishe Dalipi, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (Norman Janowitz, J.), entered January 7, 2008. The order denied plaintiff's motion to, inter alia, amend the caption.

Order affirmed without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this commercial claims action under the name "The Shade Factory" to recover a balance allegedly due for custom made window treatments. Defendant counterclaimed to recover, inter alia, for damage to her apartment resulting from plaintiff's work. Following arbitration, plaintiff's cause of action was dismissed, and defendant was awarded a judgment in the principal sum of $850 on her counterclaim. After defendant's efforts, and those of the sheriff, to collect on the judgment were unsuccessful, as plaintiff claimed that its proper name was Window Treatment Designers, Inc. d/b/a The Shade Factory, defendant returned to court, and the clerk amended the caption to reflect that plaintiff's name was Window Treatment Designers, Inc. d/b/a The Shade Factory. Plaintiff then moved to amend the caption back to "The Shade Factory."

A review of the record on appeal establishes that the District Court properly denied plaintiff's motion to amend so as to reinstate the original caption, and was correct in its nunc pro tunc amendment of the judgment to reflect the proper parties to the action (see UDCA 1814-A; Bennett v Class N' Style Travel & Limousine, Ltd., Misc 3d , 2009 NY Slip Op 29058 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2009]; Bruna v National Westminster Bank, 138 Misc 2d 548 [1988]; Siegel, NY Prac § 583, at 1013 [4th ed]). Accordingly, the District Court's order is affirmed.

Rudolph, P.J., and Molia, J., concur. [*2]

Tanenbaum, J., taking no part.
Decision Date: April 24, 2009