Teichman v. Arnow

Full title: Boris TEICHMAN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. John ARNOW, Defendant–Respondent.

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

Date published: Jun 9, 2014

43 Misc. 3d 145 (N.Y. App. Term 2014)

2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 50897

993 N.Y.S.2d 646

Opinion

No. 570218/14.

2014-06-9

Boris TEICHMAN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. John ARNOW, Defendant–Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Jennifer G. Schecter, J.), entered on or about October 17, 2013, after trial, in favor of defendant dismissing the action.
Present: SCHOENFELD, J.P., SHULMAN, LING–COHAN, JJ. PER CURIAM.

Judgment (Jennifer G. Schecter, J.), entered on or about October 17, 2013, affirmed, without costs.

The verdict issued upon the trial of this small claims action, dismissing plaintiff's lone remaining breach of contract claim against the defendant dentist, achieved substantial justice consistent with substantive law principles ( see CCA 1804, 1807), plaintiff having failed to establish that defendant made “an express special promise to effect a cure or accomplish some definite result” ( Clarke v. Mikail, 238 A.D.2d 538, 538 [1997] ). Nor did the court abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's eve-of-trial application for a further adjournment of this matter previously marked “final.”

I concur.