Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Terry-Ann Lynch v. Celeste Gadson

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM: 2nd, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


May 23, 2011

TERRY-ANN LYNCH,
RESPONDENT,
v.
CELESTE GADSON, APPELLANT -AND- SPENCER WILSON,
DEFENDANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Rudolph E. Greco, Jr., J.), entered April 20, 2010.

Lynch v Gadson

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 May 23, 2011

PRESENT: WESTON, J.P., GOLIA and RIOS, JJ

The judgment, insofar as appealed from, after a non-jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $7,500 as against defendant Celeste Gadson, and dismissed defendant Celeste Gadson's counterclaims.

ORDERED that the judgment, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover rent allegedly due from her former tenant, Celeste Gadson, as well as from one Spencer Wilson. Both defendants counterclaimed, alleging harassment. The judgment, insofar as appealed from by defendant Gadson, after a non-jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $7,500 as against Gadson and dismissed her counterclaim.

On appeal, Gadson raises a number of issues, including, among others, the alleged illegality of her rental unit and the unlawfulness of her lease or leases for the premises. Since Gadson failed to raise these issues in the Civil Court, they are outside the scope of our review (see generally CPLR 5501). The Civil Court explicitly stated that its conclusions were premised in large part on its observation of the demeanor and credibility of the witnesses. To the extent that the court's determination is challenged by Gadson, we find that it could have been reached under a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). Gardson's remaining contentions are similarly without merit. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Weston, J.P., Golia and Rios, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: May 23, 2011

20110523

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.