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.

Joseph Roccanova, Appellant v. Richard Rosen

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


December 7, 2012

JOSEPH ROCCANOVA, APPELLANT, --
v.
RICHARD ROSEN, RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Second District (Tricia M. Ferrell, J.), entered June 21, 2010.

Roccanova v Rosen

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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 7, 2012

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

The judgment, after a non-jury trial, dismissed the action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of $5,000, alleging, among other things, that he had been harassed and defamed by defendant. Plaintiff also alleged, and testified at a non-jury trial of the action, that, as a result of a complaint lodged by defendant, plaintiff had been wrongfully arrested and charged with a crime, and, in effect, that defendant had brought a frivolous civil action against plaintiff. Plaintiff asserted that, although the criminal charges had ultimately been dropped, and the civil action had been withdrawn, he had incurred legal fees in defending against the charges in both actions. Plaintiff seeks in this action to recover money damages, based on his payment of legal fees to defend himself in the prior criminal and civil proceedings, as well as money damages for defamation and harassment. Following trial, the action was dismissed.

The sole argument plaintiff makes on appeal is that the District Court lacked jurisdiction over this action. However, inasmuch as plaintiff sought to recover money damages only, in the sum of $5,000, the District Court had jurisdiction over this small claims action (see UDCA 1801).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

LaSalle, J.P., Molia and Iannacci, JJ., concur. Decision Date: December 07, 2012

20121207

© 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.