Cyriaque v Flatbush Classic Express Shipping Inc. Ltd.

Annotate this Case
[*1] Cyriaque v Flatbush Classic Express Shipping Inc. Ltd. 2005 NYSlipOp 51165(U) Decided on July 21, 2005 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on July 21, 2005
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., PATTERSON and RIOS, JJ.
2004-1402 K C

Romain Cyriaque, Appellant,

against

Flatbush Classic Express Shipping Inc. Limited, JEAN A. DEROSENA, GARRY JOSEPH, Respondents.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (A. O'Shea, J.), entered August 19, 2004, which denied his motion to amend the judgment to change the name of the judgment debtor from Flatbush Classic Express Shipping, Inc., to Flatbush E. Business Center, to add defendant Jean A. DeRosena as a judgment debtor and to change the address of defendant Jean A. DeRosena on all relevant court papers.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

On March 11, 2004, after an inquest was held, a judgment was entered in the principal sum of $6,000 in favor of plaintiff and against defendant "Flatbush Classic Express Shipping, Inc." Thereafter, plaintiff moved to amend the judgment to add defendant Jean A. DeRosena as a judgment debtor and to substitute Flatbush E. Business Center for the judgment debtor Flatbush Classic Express Shipping, Inc., in order to reflect the defendant's post-judgment name change. Since plaintiff did not seek to correct a ministerial mistake, defect, or irregularity in the judgment, but sought to change the judgment with respect to a substantive matter, i.e., substituting individual liability for a corporate liability, the lower court properly denied his motion (see CPLR 5019 [a]; Haggerty v Market Basket Enters., Inc., 8 AD3d 618 [2004]).

Decision Date: July 21, 2005

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.