Anyang-Kusi v Solomon

[*1] Anyang-Kusi v Solomon 2009 NY Slip Op 51695(U) [24 Misc 3d 140(A)] Decided on August 4, 2009 Appellate Term, First 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 August 4, 2009
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: McKeon, P.J., Heitler, J.
570309/08

Rita Anyang-Kusi, Plaintiff-Appellant,

against

Lee Solomon and Bryce Goggin, Defendants-Respondents.

Plaintiff, as limited by her brief, appeals from so much of a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court, New York County (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered on or about October 5, 2006, after trial, as limited her recovery of damages to the principal sum of $3,725.82.

Per Curiam.

Judgment (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered on or about October 5, 2006, affirmed, without costs.

The small claims judgment, awarding plaintiff-appellant the return of her security deposit less a modest offset covering her rental liability for the brief period during which the apartment premises remained vacant after her refusal to take occupancy, achieved "substantial justice" consistent with substantive law principles (see CCA 1804, 1807). Plaintiff's intent that the lease agreement she signed be valid and effective was unequivocally demonstrated by her actions, inter alia, in paying the security deposit and the first month's rent (see Townhouse Co., LLC v Williams, 307 AD2d 223 [2003]; see generally 219 Broadway Corp. v Alexander's Inc., 46 NY2d 506, 512 [1979]), together with her candid trial admission that had the obverse situation developed — viz, had she "wanted to move in and [defendants] refused — she may well have sought enforcement of the lease agreement herself ("we might be in [court] for the reverse way").

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: August 04, 2009