From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Charlie Sandlan, Inc. v. Harcourt

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, New York.
Apr 18, 2016
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 50601 (N.Y. App. Term 2016)

Opinion

No. 570088/16.

04-18-2016

CHARLIE SANDLAN, INC. d/b/a Maggie Flanigan Studio, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Sydney HARCOURT, Defendant–Respondent.


Judgment (James E. d'Auguste, J.), entered on or about April 23, 2015, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, without costs.

The amount of the damage award issued in plaintiff's favor upon the trial of this small claims action finds support in the record and achieved “substantial justice” (CCA 1804, 1807 ). The trial court's findings of fact, which, given a contract that was oral, are largely based on witness credibility, are supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see S & W Home Improvement Co. v. La Casita II H.D.F.C., 66 AD3d 505, 506 [2009] ), including, in particular, the findings that plaintiff's former owner agreed to provide defendant with “free tuition” for his second year of classes at plaintiff's acting conservatory, in exchange for defendant's performance of “work around the studio”; and that defendant, in fact, performed “extensive work,” including the “customized design and construction of a shelving unit.” Plaintiff failed to establish that an enforceable account stated exist between the parties with respect to the disputed tuition (see Ross v. Sherman, 57 AD3d 758 [2008] ).

I concur.


Summaries of

Charlie Sandlan, Inc. v. Harcourt

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, New York.
Apr 18, 2016
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 50601 (N.Y. App. Term 2016)
Case details for

Charlie Sandlan, Inc. v. Harcourt

Case Details

Full title:CHARLIE SANDLAN, INC. d/b/a Maggie Flanigan Studio, Plaintiff–Appellant…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 18, 2016

Citations

2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 50601 (N.Y. App. Term 2016)
36 N.Y.S.3d 406