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.

L. I. Weight Counseling, Inc v. Stg Properties

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


June 27, 2012

L. I. WEIGHT COUNSELING, INC.,
RESPONDENT,
v.
STG PROPERTIES, LLC,
APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (Gary Franklin Knobel, J.), entered August 13, 2010.

L. I. Weight Counseling, Inc. v Stg Props., LLC

Decided on June 27, 2012

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

PRESENT: MOLIA, J.P., IANNACCI and LaSALLE, JJ

The judgment, after a non-jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $5,000.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, defendant's former tenant, commenced this commercial claims action to recover the sum of $5,000 for the return of a security deposit. After a non-jury trial, the District Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $5,000. Upon a review of the record, we find that the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1804-A, 1807-A; see Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]).

The decision of a fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). This standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Commercial Claims Part of the court given the limited standard of review (see UDCA 1807-A; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126). As the record supports the District Court's determination, we find no reason to disturb the judgment.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Molia, J.P., Iannacci and LaSalle, JJ., concur. Decision Date: June 27, 2012

20120627

© 1992-2012 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.