Sandica v Florea

[*1] Sandica v Florea 2014 NY Slip Op 50536(U) Decided on March 21, 2014 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 21, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : ALIOTTA, J.P., PESCE and WESTON, JJ
.

Gheorghita Sandica, Respondent,

against

Botizan Florea, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Cheree A. Buggs, J.), entered October 11, 2012. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $3,000.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this small claims action to recover the principal sum of $3,000, plaintiff testified, at a nonjury trial, that a check, which defendant had given to plaintiff as partial payment for loans she had made to defendant, had bounced. The check bore a date of "January 2010." Defendant testified that plaintiff had altered the check by adding the number "23" to the date. Following the trial, the Civil Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $3,000.

Upon a review of the record, we find that substantial justice was done between the parties in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (see CCA 1804, 1807). Contrary to defendant's contention on appeal, the insertion of the number "23," where the day of the month had been omitted from the date on the face of the check, was not a material or fraudulent alteration (see UCC 3-407 [2]; Davis Auction House v Ontario Natl. Bank, 201 AD2d 878 [1994]). Thus, there is no basis to disturb the judgment.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Aliotta, J.P., Pesce and Weston, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: March 21, 2014