Conti v. Centeno
This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 50974(U) (Conti v. Centeno) 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.
Opinion
| Conti v Centeno |
| 2025 NY Slip Op 50974(U) |
| Decided on June 16, 2025 |
| Appellate Term, First 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 June 16, 2025
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., James, Perez, JJ.
570321/25
against
Kendra Centeno a/k/a Kendra A. Centeno, Defendant-Respondent.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Taisha L. Chambers, J.), entered July 11, 2024, after inquest, in favor of defendant dismissing the action.
Per Curiam.
Judgment (Taisha L. Chambers, J.), entered July 11, 2024, reversed, without costs, complaint reinstated and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $1,000.00.
Plaintiff commenced this action to recover the sum of $17,500.00 that he allegedly loaned to defendant. Upon defendant's default and an inquest, Civil Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that "no documentary evidence was submitted to demonstrate the existence or acknowledgment of a loan, or proof of the funds loaned."
Where, as here, a defendant has failed to appear and an inquest is directed, a plaintiff must still present proof of damages (see Paulson v Kotsilimbas, 124 AD2d 513, 514 [1986]). Upon review of the record, we agree that plaintiff failed to substantiate much of his claimed damages. However, he met his burden of setting forth a prima facie case as to damages in the sum of $1,000.00, as his testimony and documentary evidence established that he transferred this amount to the defendant through Western Union (see Oparaji v 245-02 Merrick Blvd, LLC, 149 AD3d 1091, 1092 [2017]; Gong Ming Chen v Phillips, 81 Misc 3d 142[A], 2024 NY Slip Op 50138[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2024]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: June 16, 2025
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2025 NY Slip Op 50974(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conti-v-centeno-nyappterm-2025.