MOUZON v. LUXE VVS JEWELERS (2025)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York,

Adam MOUZON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LUXE VVS JEWELERS, Defendant-Respondent.

570398 /25

Decided: September 15, 2025

PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., Tisch, James, JJ.

Judgment (Jeffrey S. Zellan, J.), entered May 15, 2023, affirmed, without costs.

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 find that Civil Court properly dismissed the action after inquest, since plaintiff offered no competent proof of the value of the allegedly nonconforming piece of jewelry delivered by defendant and retained by plaintiff (see Bartlett v Rosenthal, 69 Misc 3d 138[A], 2020 NY Slip Op 51305[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2020]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.

All concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network