Carlino v Darrigo

[*1] Carlino v Darrigo 2012 NY Slip Op 52418(U) Decided on December 21, 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 21, 2012
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : NICOLAI, P.J., LaCAVA and LaSALLE, JJ
2011-2970 N C.

Joseph Carlino, Respondent,

against

Josephine Darrigo, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Fourth District (Eugene H. Shifrin, Ct. Att. Ref.), entered May 3, 2011. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $4,000.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover the sum of $4,000 based upon a loan agreement. At a nonjury trial, plaintiff testified that he had loaned defendant $4,000 and that she had promised to pay the money back, but had defaulted in making payment. Plaintiff's father also testified that plaintiff had loaned defendant money. Defendant denied borrowing money from plaintiff. Following the trial, the District Court found for plaintiff, awarding him the principal sum of $4,000.

On appeal, defendant contends that the court made its determination based on the father's testimony, which was inadmissible hearsay. However, it is evident from a review of the record that the District Court did not base its determination solely on hearsay (see Levins v Bucholtz, 2 AD2d 351 [1956]; see also UDCA 1804). Thus, we conclude that the judgment, which was supported by the evidence, rendered substantial justice between the parties in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1804, 1807). [*2]

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Nicolai, P.J., LaCava and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: December 21, 2012