From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Borisovski v. Lamarre

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
Jan 27, 2020
66 Misc. 3d 138 (N.Y. App. Term 2020)

Opinion

19-369

01-27-2020

Alexandre BORISOVSKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joseph LAMARRE, Defendant-Respondent.


Per Curiam.

Order (Judy H. Kim, J.), entered June 13, 2019, reversed, without costs, defendant's motion to dismiss is denied, and the action is reinstated.

Pretrial motions to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action should rarely, if ever, be entertained in Small Claims Court (see Friedman v. Seward Park Hous. Corp. , 167 Misc 2d 57 [App Term, 1st Dept 1995] ; see also Rackowski v Araya , 152 AD3d 834, 836 [2017] ), and no exception to the rule is warranted in this case. "Substantial justice" ( CCA 1804 ) will best be rendered by a prompt trial, where defendant may assert his substantive arguments for dismissal.

In reinstating the action, we express no view as to its ultimate outcome on the merits.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


Summaries of

Borisovski v. Lamarre

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
Jan 27, 2020
66 Misc. 3d 138 (N.Y. App. Term 2020)
Case details for

Borisovski v. Lamarre

Case Details

Full title:Alexandre Borisovski, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joseph Lamarre…

Court:SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT

Date published: Jan 27, 2020

Citations

66 Misc. 3d 138 (N.Y. App. Term 2020)
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 50080
120 N.Y.S.3d 695

Citing Cases

Polanco v. The City of New York

"The informality and convenience of small claims practice is necessarily frustrated by requiring pro se…

Hao Zhe Wang v. Sladkus

"The informality and convenience of small claims practice is necessarily frustrated by requiring pro se…