Bradford v Salvatore

[*1] Bradford v Salvatore 2005 NY Slip Op 51684(U) [9 Misc 3d 135(A)] Decided on October 20, 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 October 20, 2005
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: RUDOLPH, P.J., ANGIOLILLO and McCABE, JJ.
2004-1734 N C

JOHN R. BRADFORD, Respondent,

against

MANGIA SALVATORE d/b/a CITIWIDE & DRAIN, PROMPT MECHANICAL, CITYWIDE SEWER & DRAIN SERVICES CORP., Defendants, -and- LONG ISLAND PLUMBING, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Second District (Lea Ruskin, J.), entered June 24, 2004. The judgment, insofar as appealed from by defendant Long Island Plumbing, awarded plaintiff after a nonjury trial, the principal sum of $900. [*2]

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

Labor Law § 193 expressly prohibits deductions from the wages of an employee except where these are made in accordance with the law, rule or regulation of any governmental agency (Labor Law § 193 [1] [a]) or are expressly authorized in writing by the employee and are for the benefit of the employee (Labor Law § 193 [1] [b]). In the instant case, the deduction of $600 from the plaintiff's wages for damages to the van leased by plaintiff from defendant, which were allegedly caused by plaintiff during the course of his employment, did not fall within the two narrowly circumscribed exceptions provided for under the statute. Accordingly, the court below properly awarded judgment to plaintiff as to this element of his claim for damages. Moreover, defendant Long Island Plumbing raises no issue concerning the award of $300 as damages for plaintiff's tools which were not returned to him upon termination of his employment. In view of the foregoing, we are of the opinion that, in this small claims action, substantial justice was done between the parties in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1807).

We note that the copy of the Vehicle Lease Agreement between plaintiff and defendant Long Island Plumbing attached to defendant's brief on appeal is dehors the [*3]
record and will not be considered for the first time on appeal. In any event, the Vehicle Lease Agreement does not warrant a different disposition than the one reached herein (see Labor Law § 193).
Decision Date: October 20, 2005