Carol v. West Chelsea Veterinary Hosp.

Full title: VIOLA CAROL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VETERINARY HOSPITAL…

Court: Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 24, 2006

2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 50080 (N.Y. App. Term 2006)

814 N.Y.S.2d 889

Opinion

570823/05.

Decided January 24, 2006.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered on or about February 8, 2005, after trial, in favor of defendant dismissing the action.

Judgment (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered on or about February 8, 2005, affirmed, without costs.

PRESENT: Suarez, P.J., McCooe, Schoenfeld, JJ

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff seeks a refund of fees paid to defendant for veterinary services, claiming that the services rendered were unnecessary. The dismissal after trial achieved substantial justice in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (CCA 1804, 1807). There is no basis to disturb the court's determination which rests in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses ( see Williams v. Roper, 269 AD2d 125, appeal dismissed 95 NY2d 898).

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.

I concur.