Ajibade v. Adee & Lester, LP

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Ajibade v. Adee & Lester, LP

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 22, 2017

Docket2017 NYSlipOp 50852(U)

StatusPublished

This text of Ajibade v. Adee & Lester, LP (Ajibade v. Adee & Lester, LP) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ajibade v. Adee & Lester, LP, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Akinjide Samuel Ajibade, Appellant,

against

Adee & Lester, LP, Respondent.

Akinjide Samuel Ajibade, appellant pro se. Kerley, Walsh, Matera & Cinquemani, P.C. (Lauren B. Bristol, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (James M. Darcy, J.), entered March 16, 2015. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action against defendant, his landlord, to recover for water damage to his property caused by an allegedly faulty water sprinkler in the apartment above. After a nonjury trial, the District Court dismissed the action, finding that plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case of negligence and, in any event, had failed to prove damages.

In a small claims action, our review is limited to a determination of whether "substantial justice has . . . been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law" (UDCA 1807; see UDCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). The determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). This deference applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims [*2]Part of the court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126).

Upon a review of the record, we find no basis to disturb the District Court's determination, as it provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (see UDCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

TOLBERT, J.P., GARGUILO and BRANDS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: June 22, 2017

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Akinjide Samuel Ajibade, Appellant,

against

Adee & Lester, LP, Respondent.

Akinjide Samuel Ajibade, appellant pro se. Kerley, Walsh, Matera & Cinquemani, P.C. (Lauren B. Bristol, Esq.), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (James M. Darcy, J.), entered March 16, 2015. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action against defendant, his landlord, to recover for water damage to his property caused by an allegedly faulty water sprinkler in the apartment above. After a nonjury trial, the District Court dismissed the action, finding that plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case of negligence and, in any event, had failed to prove damages.

In a small claims action, our review is limited to a determination of whether "substantial justice has . . . been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law" (UDCA 1807; see UDCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). The determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). This deference applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims [*2]Part of the court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126).

Upon a review of the record, we find no basis to disturb the District Court's determination, as it provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (see UDCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

TOLBERT, J.P., GARGUILO and BRANDS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: June 22, 2017

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ajibade v. Adee & Lester, LP, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ajibade-v-adee-lester-lp-nyappterm-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack