Thompson v Gil

[*1] Thompson v Gil 2012 NY Slip Op 51973(U) Decided on October 11, 2012 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 October 11, 2012
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : IANNACCI, J.P., MOLIA and LaCAVA, JJ
2011-1676 W C.

Dominique Thompson, Appellant,

against

Joel Gil, Respondent.

Appeal, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, Westchester County (Thomas R. Daly, J.), entered June 29, 2010. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,305.40.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the City Court for a new trial limited to the issue of damages.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover the sum of $4,200 for damage to her vehicle caused by defendant. After a nonjury trial, at which plaintiff submitted three estimates of the cost of repairs, the City Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,305.40. Plaintiff appeals on the ground of inadequacy, contending that the principal sum awarded by the City Court was based on an estimate of $1,305.40, which represented the repair of her vehicle's door only and did not include an amount for the additional necessary body work as set forth in defendant's insurance carrier's estimate, in the sum of $1,694.99.

Upon a review of the record, we find that substantial justice between the parties (UCCA 1807) requires that the judgment be reversed and the matter remitted to the City Court for a new trial limited to the issue of damages as it is not possible to determine from plaintiff's estimates whether, as she contends, the two estimates she refers to were for wholly distinct repairs, the total cost of which should have been awarded to her, or whether these estimates were partially or entirely duplicative of each other, and should not be totaled in calculating the award of damages.

Iannacci, J.P., Molia and LaCava, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: October 11, 2012