Poveromo v. Qia Wen Huang

72 Misc. 3d 139(A), 2021 NY Slip Op 50778(U)

• Court: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
• Decided: July 30, 2021
• Docket: 2021-197 K C
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Poveromo v Qia Wen Huang (2021 NY Slip Op 50778(U)) [*1]

Poveromo v Qia Wen Huang

2021 NY Slip Op 50778(U) [72 Misc 3d 139(A)]

Decided on July 30, 2021

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 July 30, 2021

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, P.J., MICHELLE WESTON, WAVNY TOUSSAINT, JJ
2021-197 K C

Joseph Poveromo, Appellant,

against

Qia Wen Huang, Respondent.

Joseph Poveromo, appellant pro se. Qia Wen Huang, respondent pro se (no brief filed).

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Lorna J. McAllister, J.), entered October 21, 2019. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action seeking to recover the principal sum of $2,046 for property damage to his awning. At a nonjury trial, plaintiff conceded that someone other than defendant had damaged his property. Following the trial, the Civil Court dismissed the action.

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" (CCA 1807; see CCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]).

Upon a review of the record, we find no basis to disturb the court's determination dismissing the action, as plaintiff failed to establish liability on the part of defendant since plaintiff conceded that someone other than defendant had damaged his awning.

In view of the foregoing, we find that the judgment rendered substantial justice (see CCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., WESTON and TOUSSAINT, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: July 30, 2021