Snider v Russ's Auto Sales, Inc.

[*1] Snider v Russ's Auto Sales, Inc. 2010 NY Slip Op 52356(U) [30 Misc 3d 133(A)] Decided on October 21, 2010 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 21, 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MOLIA, J.P., TANENBAUM and LaCAVA, JJ
2009-1038 S C.

Sarra Snider and Frank Snider, Appellants,

against

Russ's Auto Sales, Inc., Respondent.

Appeal, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, Sixth District (Howard M. Bergson, J.), entered October 27, 2008. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiffs the principal sum of $435.

ORDERED that the judgment is modified by increasing the amount awarded to plaintiffs to the principal sum of $1,425.16; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiffs seek to recover the cost of repairs to a used automobile which they purchased from defendant on September 6, 2007. At the nonjury trial, plaintiff Frank Snider testified that one week after he had purchased the used vehicle from defendant, he began experiencing problems with the transmission and fuel pump module. In addition, he testified that to make the necessary repairs to the vehicle, he had paid $435 for the transmission repairs, $93 for new spark plugs and $897.16 to repair the fuel pump module. However, the District Court found that only $435 for the transmission repairs was covered under the "Used Car Lemon Law" (General Business Law § 198-b), and awarded judgment in favor of plaintiffs in that principal amount. Plaintiffs appeal on the ground of inadequacy.

Upon a review of the record, we find that substantial justice was not done between the parties in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1804, 1807). The evidence at trial established that plaintiffs were also entitled, under the circumstances presented, to recover $93 for the spark plugs and $897.16 for repairs to the fuel pump module (see General Business Law § 198-b [6] [b] [2]). Accordingly, the judgment in favor of plaintiffs is modified by increasing the amount awarded to plaintiffs by $990.16 to the total principal sum of [*2]$1,425.16.

Molia, J.P., Tanenbaum and LaCava, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: October 21, 2010