Reim v. Barotz

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Reim v. Barotz

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 23, 2016

Docket2016 NYSlipOp 50799(U)

StatusPublished

This text of Reim v. Barotz (Reim v. Barotz) 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

Reim v. Barotz, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Jordana Reim, Plaintiff-Respondent,

against

Norman Barotz, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (James E. d'Auguste, J.), entered on or about June 27, 2013, after trial, in favor of plaintiff and awarding her damages in the principal sum of $3,900, and dismissing defendant's counterclaim.

Per Curiam.

Judgment (James E. d'Auguste, J.), entered on or about June 27, 2013, affirmed, without costs.

The record establishes that the trial court applied the appropriate rules and principles of substantive law and accomplished "substantial justice" in awarding judgment in plaintiff's favor on her claim for refund of a security deposit and dismissing defendant's counterclaim (CCA 1804, 1807; see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000], lv dismissed 95 NY2d 898 [2000]). A fair interpretation of the evidence, including the parties' photographs, supports the trial court's express finding that plaintiff "left the apartment in as-good or better condition than when she took possession" and that there was "no basis for a reduction from the security deposit for the other charges sought to be imposed."

We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: May 23, 2016

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

Jordana Reim, Plaintiff-Respondent,

against

Norman Barotz, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (James E. d'Auguste, J.), entered on or about June 27, 2013, after trial, in favor of plaintiff and awarding her damages in the principal sum of $3,900, and dismissing defendant's counterclaim.

Per Curiam.

Judgment (James E. d'Auguste, J.), entered on or about June 27, 2013, affirmed, without costs.

The record establishes that the trial court applied the appropriate rules and principles of substantive law and accomplished "substantial justice" in awarding judgment in plaintiff's favor on her claim for refund of a security deposit and dismissing defendant's counterclaim (CCA 1804, 1807; see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000], lv dismissed 95 NY2d 898 [2000]). A fair interpretation of the evidence, including the parties' photographs, supports the trial court's express finding that plaintiff "left the apartment in as-good or better condition than when she took possession" and that there was "no basis for a reduction from the security deposit for the other charges sought to be imposed."

We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: May 23, 2016

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Reim v. Barotz, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reim-v-barotz-nyappterm-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack