Ranadive v Harvey
Annotate this CaseDecided on December 11, 2017
Justice Court of the Village of Montebello, Rockland County
Girish Ranadive and SUCHITA RANADIVE, Plaintiffs,
against
Ronald M. Harvey and DEBORAH J. JINDELA, Defendants.
xxxxx
Arnold P. Etelson, J.
In this small claims action Plaintiff has sued for reimbursement of the $595.00 he spent for an inspection in connection with the prospective purchase of a home. Plaintiff's broker prepared a binder to purchase defendant's home for $725,000.00. The seller defendant held out for $750,000.00 for which plaintiff agreed. A new binder was prepared, each having been signed by plaintiff. Defendant signed neither. Defendant's attorney, however, followed up with a contract and mailed it to plaintiff's attorney who had plaintiff sign it and returned it to defendant's attorney who became very busy with some litigation and eventually turned it over to another attorney to represent defendant. The situation dragged on for several weeks during which time defendant's broker found another buyer willing to pay $765,000.00 in a cash deal. During this time plaintiff attempted to contact defendant's broker but received no answer. The deal with the new buyer who obtained his own inspection consummated with its closing.
Plaintiff, through his attorn ey, requested that defendant reimburse him for the $595.00. Defendant refused based upon the fact that no contract between the parties was ever signed.
Section 1804 of the Uniform Justice Court Act states that the "court shall conduct hearings upon small claims in such manner as to do substantial justice between the parties according to the rules of substantive law ... "
My research in this case came up with no case describing substantial justice and perhaps there isn't one. Most of the Appellate decisions describe what is not substantial justice. Lockwood v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp . (112 AD2d 495) states that a trial court's decision in a Small Claim action can only be reversed if it was "clearly erroneous" and the deviation from substantive law is "readily apparent."
When considering substantial justice the words that come to my mind are fair, right, common sense, just, correct, moral, good, proper, appropriate, practical, ethical, suitable, reasonable, etc.
Roscoe Pound, former Dean of Harvard Law School and jurist wrote in 1935, "Some twenty years ago I pointed out two ideas running through definitions of law: one an imperative idea, an idea of a rule laid down by the lawmaking organ of a politically organized society, deriving its force from the authority of the sovereign; and the other a rational or ethical idea, an idea of a rule of right and justice deriving its authority from its intrinsic reasonableness or conformity to ideals of right and merely recognized, not made, by the sovereign." Roscoe Pound, More About the Nature of Law," in Legal Essays in Tribute to Orrin Kip McMurray at 513, 515 (1935).
It is so obvious that defendant would not turn down an offer providing for an additional $15,000.00 in a cash deal. Plaintiff's deal would have been contingent upon him obtaining a mortgage in order to close. Having received the benefit of a higher price and presumably a quicker closing date, defendant was very comfortably enriched with a better deal. Any reasoned prospective purchaser of a home in this price range would be well advised to order an inspection before contract or as a subject to condition in the contract. Any of the words I mention above it seems to me demand that plaintiff be reimbursed for his inspection fee legitimately expended in seeking the purchase of defendant's home.
Plaintiff shall have judgment against defendant for the sum of $595.00, plus interest from April 30, 2017, in the sum of $31.24, plus the $10.00 filing fee, a total of $636.24.
The aforesaid is the Judgment of the Court.
Dated: Montebello, New York
December 11, 2017
HON. ARNOLD P. ETELSON
MONTEBELLO VILLAGE JUSTICE
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.
