Opinion
570805/17
02-20-2018
Sudarshan THIND, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Dr. Carey SKORSKI, Defendant–Respondent.
Per Curiam.
Judgment (Armando Montano, J.), entered on or about July 28, 2017, affirmed, without costs.
A judgment rendered in the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court will be sustained on appeal unless it is shown that "substantial justice has not been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law" ( CCA 1807 ; see Williams v. Roper , 269 AD2d 125 [2000], lv dismissed 95 NY2d 898 [2000] ). Applying that limited standard of review in the matter at bar, we find no basis to substitute our judgment for that of the trial court in dismissing plaintiff's contract, overcharge and related claims after a full trial. A fair interpretation of the evidence supports the trial court's detailed findings that plaintiff failed to establish that she was entitled to a further refund of money from defendant medical doctor, particularly where it was undisputed that plaintiff received medical treatment from defendant and defendant established that he had, before the trial, refunded a majority of his fees to plaintiff.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.