Marino v. N.A.S. Plumbings&sHeating Contractors, Inc.

Full title: Marino v. N.A.S. Plumbings&sHeating Contractors, Inc.

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

Date published: Oct 31, 1997

175 Misc. 2d 519 (N.Y. App. Term 1997)

670 N.Y.S.2d 671

Opinion

175 Misc.2d 519 670 N.Y.S.2d 671 Frank MARINO, Appellant, v. N.A.S. PLUMBING & HEATING CONTRACTORS, INC., Respondent. 1998-98,133 Supreme Court of New York, Second Department Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department, October 31, 1997.

David Gevanter, Hicksville, for appellant.

Before DiPAOLA, P.J., and COLLINS and INGRASSIA, JJ.

MEMORANDUM.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[670 N.Y.S.2d 672]The court below properly permitted the corporate defendant to interpose a counterclaim in this small claims action (see, Bovasso v. Anchor South Shore Automobile Inc., NYLJ, July 3, 1984, App.Term [9th & 10th Jud.Dists.] ). As this court stated: "[n]either the applicable statute (see, UDCA 1809[1] ) nor policy considerations preclude the interposition in a small claims action of a corporate defendant counterclaim falling within the court's monetary jurisdiction (see, UDCA 1805[d] ) which is related to the main claim and not overly complex, such as involved herein"(id.; see also, Collins v. John J. Hayes Motor Sales, Inc., NYLJ, Sept. 8, 1983, App.Term [9th & 10th Jud.Dists.]; Cano v. L.I.L. Co., 113 Misc.2d 411, 449 N.Y.S.2d 136). To the extent that the cases of Hayden v. Lilco, 116 Misc.2d 445, 455 N.Y.S.2d 715, and Manson v. Ficara, 118 Misc.2d 74, 459 N.Y.S.2d 719, are to the contrary, we decline to follow these. Moreover, there is no basis upon this record to disturb the award of $1,575 to defendant on its counterclaim, which the court properly offset against the award of $1,600 in favor of plaintiff on its claim.