Hazzard v Volvoville

[*1] Hazzard v Volvoville 2007 NY Slip Op 50684(U) [15 Misc 3d 132(A)] Decided on March 28, 2007 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 March 28, 2007
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : McCABE, J.P., TANENBAUM and LIPPMAN, JJ
2006-1076 N C.

Steven Hazzard, SR., Appellant,

against

Volvoville, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Fourth District (Martin J. Massell, J.), entered September 14, 2005. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiff's action.

Judgment affirmed without costs.

Plaintiff commenced the instant small claims action to recover for damage allegedly sustained to his vehicle. However, at trial, plaintiff failed to prove his damages through either expert testimony or an itemized bill or invoice, receipted or marked paid, or two itemized estimates for services or repairs (see UDCA 1804). While plaintiff argues on appeal that the lower court did not advise him of his need to present evidence of his damages, it is well settled that a plaintiff who appears pro se does so at
his own peril and acquires no greater right than that of any other litigant (see Roundtree v Singh, 143 AD2d 995 [1988]).

Therefore, the lower court's judgment dismissing plaintiff's action rendered substantial justice between the parties in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1807).

McCabe, J.P., Tanenbaum and Lippman, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: March 28, 2007