Vessa v Gull Wing Motors, Inc.

[*1] Vessa v Gull Wing Motors, Inc. 2012 NY Slip Op 52390(U) Decided on December 20, 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 20, 2012
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MOLIA, J.P., NICOLAI and IANNACCI, JJ
2011-2128 N C.

Virginia Vessa and Al Vessa, Respondents,

against

Gull Wing Motors, Inc. and LOU PALUMBO, Appellants.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Fourth District (Michael S. Alonge, J.), entered May 10, 2010. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiffs the principal sum of $1,050 as against both defendants.

ORDERED that the judgment is modified by vacating so much of the judgment as is against defendant Lou Palumbo and by providing that the action against defendant Lou Palumbo is dismissed; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs commenced this small claims action to recover the sum of $1,050, alleging that defendants had defectively repaired plaintiffs' vehicle. Plaintiffs had paid defendant Gull Wing Motors, Inc. the sum of $1,186.73 for the repairs to their motor vehicle. Plaintiffs paid a second repair shop $1,400 to correct the corporate defendant's defective repair. After a nonjury trial, the District Court awarded plaintiffs the principal sum of $1,050. Defendants appeal.

Upon a review of the record, we find that the judgment provided substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1804, 1807; see Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]) insofar as it was against the corporate defendant. However, the complaint is dismissed as to the individual [*2]defendant, as we find no basis to hold the individual defendant, Lou Palumbo, personally liable (see S. F. P. Realty Corp. v G. S. Rockaway Dev., 206 AD2d 417 [1994]; Ruti v Knapp, 193 AD2d 662 [1993]).

Accordingly, the judgment is modified by vacating so much of the judgment as is against defendant Lou Palumbo and by providing that the action against defendant Lou Palumbo is dismissed.

Molia, J.P., Nicolai and Iannacci, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: December 20, 2012