From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mead Home Improvement v. Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 14, 2008
56 A.D.3d 1179 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. CA 08-00162.

November 14, 2008.

Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Richard A. Keenan, J.), entered April 3, 2007. The order affirmed a judgment of the Rochester City Court (Teresa D. Johnson, J.), dated September 21, 2006 in favor of plaintiff in a small claims action.

PAUL M. ALOI, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Before: Martoche, J.P., Smith, Centra, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.


It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order affirming City Court's judgment in favor of plaintiff in this small claims action. Contrary to defendant's contention, we conclude that "substantial justice has . . . been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law," and thus we affirm (UJCA 1807; see generally Sten v Desrocher, 8 AD3d 915; Coppola v Kandey Co., 236 AD2d 871).


Summaries of

Mead Home Improvement v. Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 14, 2008
56 A.D.3d 1179 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Mead Home Improvement v. Goldstein

Case Details

Full title:MEAD HOME IMPROVEMENT, INC., Respondent, v. JEANETTE GOLDSTEIN, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 14, 2008

Citations

56 A.D.3d 1179 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 8833
866 N.Y.S.2d 889

Citing Cases

Ross v. Landau

Contrary to plaintiff's contention, County Court did not apply the incorrect standard of appellate review.…

Martinez v. Rembert

The record establishes that plaintiff and defendant gave different versions of the automobile accident,…