Opinion
2016-2586 N C
09-27-2018
TOWN & COUNTRY JCD, Respondent, v. Andre E. VIXAMA, Appellant.
Andre E. Vixama, appellant pro se. Town & Country JCD, respondent pro se (no brief filed).
Andre E. Vixama, appellant pro se.
Town & Country JCD, respondent pro se (no brief filed).
PRESENT: ANTHONY MARANO, P.J., JAMES V. BRANDS, TERRY JANE RUDERMAN, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, without costs, and the action is dismissed.
Plaintiff commenced this commercial claims action to recover the principal sum of $1,514.14 as a result of defendant's alleged breach of a contract to purchase a vehicle from plaintiff. After a nonjury trial, the District Court awarded plaintiff a judgment in the principal sum of $1,514.14.
In a commercial claims action, this court's review is limited to determining whether the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (see UDCA 1807-A [a]; 1804-A; Ross v. Friedman , 269 AD2d 584 [2000] ; Williams v. Roper , 269 AD2d 125 [2000] ).
Upon a review of the record, we find that substantial justice was not done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law (see UDCA 1807-A [a]; 1804-A; Ross v. Friedman , 269 AD2d 584 ; Williams v. Roper , 269 AD2d 125 ). Here, plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of $1,514.14 based upon a clause in one of the contractual documents signed by defendant which stated that defendant could potentially be charged a "surcharge in the amount not to exceed $1967." However, the contract failed to sufficiently specify how the amount of the "surcharge" was to be calculated. In light of this ambiguity, this separate contract will not be enforced.
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the action is dismissed.
MARANO, P.J., BRANDS and RUDERMAN, JJ., concur.