CONTI v. CENTENO (2025)

Judgment (Taisha L. Chambers, J.), entered July 11, 2024, reversed, without costs, complaint reinstated and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $1,000.00.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover the sum of $17,500.00 that he allegedly loaned to defendant. Upon defendant's default and an inquest, Civil Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that “no documentary evidence was submitted to demonstrate the existence or acknowledgment of a loan, or proof of the funds loaned.”

Where, as here, a defendant has failed to appear and an inquest is directed, a plaintiff must still present proof of damages (see Paulson v Kotsilimbas, 124 AD2d 513, 514 [1986]). Upon review of the record, we agree that plaintiff failed to substantiate much of his claimed damages. However, he met his burden of setting forth a prima facie case as to damages in the sum of $1,000.00, as his testimony and documentary evidence established that he transferred this amount to the defendant through Western Union (see Oparaji v 245-02 Merrick Blvd, LLC, 149 AD3d 1091, 1092 [2017]; Gong Ming Chen v Phillips, 81 Misc 3d 142[A], 2024 NY Slip Op 50138[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2024]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.

All concur.