Richards v Piquant

Annotate this Case
[*1] Richards v Piquant 2012 NY Slip Op 52182(U) Decided on November 26, 2012 Appellate Term, Second 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 November 26, 2012
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : NICOLAI, P.J., IANNACCI and LaSALLE, JJ
2011-973 N C.

Balfour Richards, Appellant, Nov 26, 2012

against

Marjorie Piquant and DESMOND ST. LOUIS, Respondents.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Second District (Tricia M. Ferrell, J.), entered June 4, 2010. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.


ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the District Court for the entry of judgment in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $2,050.

Plaintiff, defendants' former landlord, commenced this small claims action to recover the sum of $2,650, representing one month's rent arrears of $1,600, plus late fees and unpaid cable and electric bills. Following a nonjury trial, the District Court dismissed the action. On appeal, plaintiff argues that the court erred in failing to award him the one month's rent and late fees for 10 months.

Plaintiff's proof established that December 2008 rent of $1,600 and late fees of $45 per month for 10 months had not been paid, and defendants did not testify that they had paid the December 2008 rent or the late fees, nor did they dispute plaintiff's testimony that they had paid the rent late for 10 months. Consequently, substantial justice between the parties (UDCA 1804, 1807) requires that the judgment be reversed and that plaintiff be awarded the principal sum of $2,050. [*2]

Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the matter is remitted to the District Court for the entry of judgment in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $2,050.

Nicolai, P.J., Iannacci and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: November 26, 2012

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.