Reccy v Bellasario

Annotate this Case
[*1] Reccy v Bellasario 2012 NY Slip Op 50433(U) Decided on March 6, 2012 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 March 6, 2012
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : LaCAVA, J.P., MOLIA and IANNACCI, JJ
2011-1385 W C.

Cisco Reccy, Appellant,

against

John Bellasario and ANN FEDERICO, Respondents.

Appeal, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, Westchester County (Richard F. Sweeney, J.), entered November 15, 2010. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $600.


ORDERED that the judgment is modified by providing that the award in favor of plaintiff is increased by $1,200 to the principal sum of $1,800; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this small claims action seeking to recover a security deposit of $1,800, plaintiff appeals, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment, following a nonjury trial, awarding him the principal sum of $600, after deducting $1,200 from the security deposit for July 2010 use and occupancy. The evidence adduced at trial established that defendant Bellasario terminated plaintiff's lease as of June 30, 2010. Plaintiff vacated the premises on June 30, 2010 and asked defendant Bellasario to do a walk-through on that date, but defendant postponed the walk-through for a later date. Under the circumstances, we find that plaintiff is not liable for the July 2010 use and occupancy. Consequently, substantial justice (see UCCA 1807) requires that the award to plaintiff be increased by $1,200. Accordingly, the judgment is modified by [*2]increasing the amount awarded to plaintiff to the principal sum of $1,800.

LaCava, J.P., Molia and Iannacci, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: March 06, 2012

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.