Cherry v Mendez

[*1] Cherry v Mendez 2013 NY Slip Op 51795(U) Decided on October 28, 2013 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 October 28, 2013
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Lowe, III, P.J., Schoenfeld, Hunter, Jr., JJ
570351/13.

Leonard Cherry, Plaintiff-Respondent,

against

Flavio Mendez and Cross Bronx Realty LLC, Defendants-Appellants.

In consolidated actions, defendants appeal from two amended judgments of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Raul Cruz, J.), entered on or about November 5, 2012, after trial, in favor of plaintiff and against defendants jointly and severally in the principal sum of $886. On the Court's own motion, the defendants' notice of appeal from the initial judgment entered on or about October 9, 2012, is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the amended judgment entered on or about November 5, 2012 (see CPLR 5520[c]).

Per Curiam.

Amended judgments (Raul Cruz, J.), entered on or about November 5, 2012, affirmed, without costs.

The verdict issued upon the trial of these consolidated small claims actions, awarding plaintiff the balance ($886) shown to be due for plumbing services rendered at defendants' request, finds support in the record and accomplished "substantial justice" between the parties consistent with substantive law principles (CCA 1804, 1807). Notable is the individual defendant's concession at trial that he would have paid plaintiff "with no problem" for the plumbing work concededly undertaken by plaintiff, but withheld payment so as to teach plaintiff's principal a "lesson" for his "attitude."

Although the trial court did not render a decision in conformity with CPLR 4213(b), we find, upon our independent review of the complete record (see Weckstein v Breitbart, 111 AD2d 618 [1995]), that the evidence supports the court's determination.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: October 28, 2013