Bevilaqua-Fiorino v Top Class Limousine

[*1] qua-Fiorino v Top Class Limousine 2005 NYSlipOp 50529(U) Decided on April 13, 2005 Appellate Term, Second 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 April 13, 2005
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM : 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS PRESENT : RUDOLPH, P.J., ANGIOLILLO and COVELLO, JJ.
2004-1004 W C

Patricia Bevilaqua-Fiorino, Respondent,

against

Top Class Limousine, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Justice Court, Town of Harrison, Westchester County (M. Lust, J.), entered April 14, 2004, awarding plaintiff the principal sum of $1,103.

Judgment unanimously modified by reducing the award in favor of plaintiff to the sum of $1; as so modified, affirmed without costs.

Plaintiff hired defendant, a business located in Yonkers, to provide her with limousine services for her wedding. It started snowing the day before her wedding and six to eight inches had accumulated by the day of her wedding. Due to the snow, defendant allegedly was unable to get its vehicles out of its garage and cancelled its contract with plaintiff on the day it was supposed to provide the services. Defendant, refunded all monies paid by plaintiff. Despite the last minute cancellation, plaintiff was able to hire another transportation company, and the start of her wedding was not delayed. Plaintiff subsequently commenced the instant action seeking reimbursement, inter alia, of the monies she paid to hire the other company on her wedding day.
Contrary to defendant's contention, this was not commenced as a small claims action. Plaintiff, a resident of the municipality at the time the summons and complaint were filed, properly commenced this action against defendant, a Yonkers business, in the regular part of the Justice Court (see UJCA 213 [a] [1]; 403). A review of the record on appeal indicates that the determination of the court below that defendant breached the contract could have been reached under a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v [*2]Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]; Perez v Garcia, 304 AD2d 544 [2003]). However, plaintiff failed to establish that she sustained any actual damages. It is uncontroverted that plaintiff was refunded the monies she paid to defendant, and actually saved over nine hundred dollars by using another transportation provider. Nevertheless, "the law always infers at least nominal damages" upon a breach of contract (see e.g. Kronos, Inc. v AVX Corp., 81 NY2d 90, [*3]
95 [1993]), and plaintiff is entitled to recover such damages so as to vindicate her rights arising therefrom (see e.g. Magu Realty Co. v Spartan Concrete Corp., 239 AD2d 469 [1997]). Accordingly, the judgment is reduced to $1.
Decision Date: April 13, 2005