Ruderman v Tsymbal

[*1] Ruderman v Tsymbal 2012 NY Slip Op 50124(U) Decided on January 24, 2012 Civil Court Of The City Of New York, New York County Chan, J. 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 January 24, 2012
Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County

Irving Ruderman, Plaintiff,

against

Karina Tsymbal, Defendant.



CV- 16094/11

Margaret A. Chan, J.

Plaintiff sought to recover from defendant, her share of travel expenses. At a trial on November 14, 2011, both parties were self-represented and defendant testified through a court-appointed Russian interpreter.

Plaintiff testified that he loved to travel and during one of his trips, he met defendant on a ski slope shuttle bus and that led to him letting her use his hotel amenities, i.e. jacuzzi. They continued communicating even after the ski trip via e-mail. As defendant also shared a love for traveling, he invited her on a couple of trips to North Carolina and South Hampton, NY, even though they had no relationship of any kind - they were "travel buddies". He claimed that defendant agreed to share the expenses of the trips, but did not do so. He felt that defendant should pay her share of the room for the South Hampton trip even though she declined to share a double bed with him notwithstanding his offer to separate their respective sides of the bed by placing his luggage down the middle of the bed. He added that he told her they had to pretend they were a couple to get this room.

Defendant stated that she did not agree to pay for the trips as she was his guest. As for the North Carolina trip, she testified that she did not ask for money even though she drove her car and paid for gas from Washington D.C. to North Carolina. That was her share of expenses for the trip. Plaintiff responded that he had to take a bus from New York to Washington D.C. with his food, as [*2]he keeps Kosher. He even made arrangements for her to have a free Shabbat dinner. Therefore, that was his share of the expenses. As proof that defendant agreed to pay for half the trips, plaintiff presented a lengthy e-mail between the parties which detailed the trips as to the different costs in the different hotels and rooms and vicinities and conditions, to which defendant responded "sounds fine".

What this case sounds like is not what plaintiff represents. There is no evidence of a meeting of the minds for defendant to pay anything for the trip - especially when plaintiff did not seek money from her when she did not pay for the North Carolina trip, but still invited her on another trip to South Hampton. As for the South Hampton trip, the fact that she did not want to share a bed with him does not mean she should be paying for the empty side of the bed. There is no cause of action for having a bed that is too big for him alone.

Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed.



Dated: January 24, 2012__________________________

HON. MARGARET A. CHAN

Judge, Civil Court