Dyce v Singer

[*1] Dyce v Singer 2013 NY Slip Op 23160 Decided on May 14, 2013 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the printed Miscellaneous Reports.

Decided on May 14, 2013
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Schoenfeld, J.P., Hunter, Jr., Torres, JJ
13-099.

Douglas Dyce, Plaintiff-Appellant,

against

Sol Singer, D. Siegal, National LLC and 2344 Owners LLC, Defendants-Respondents.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Margaret A. Chan, J.), entered on or about July 19, 2011, after trial, in favor of defendants dismissing the action.

Per Curiam.

Judgment (Margaret A. Chan, J.), entered on or about July 19, 2011, reversed, without costs, and new trial ordered.

Plaintiff instituted this small claims action based on defendant's alleged "nonpayment of wages" claimed to have been earned by plaintiff for painting the fire escapes appurtenant to a building owned and managed by defendants. In response to plaintiff's prima facie showing at trial that he rendered the painting services agreed upon, defendant submitted photographs of the work site in support of its position that plaintiff's paint job was both incomplete and marked by poor workmanship. Unfortunately, those photographs, while viewed by the court and specifically referenced in its written decision, were not marked as exhibits or introduced into evidence, and thus are not included in the record on appeal. In this posture, where the proffered photographs bore directly on the key factual issues in the litigation and the absence of the photographs from the record precludes effective appellate review, we are constrained to order a new trial. In so doing, we emphasize that, despite the informal procedure governing small claims actions (see CCA 1804), it is imperative that judges who preside over what is fairly described as the "people's court" take all reasonable steps to ensure that a true and accurate record is developed in each and every case. The public's continued confidence in the fairness of small claims dispositions demands no less.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: May 14, 2013