CHOPENKO v. HWANG (2020)

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover the principal sum of $5,000 based on defendant's failure to “legalize” the attic of plaintiff's house under a contract to perform certain construction work at plaintiff's house. At an inquest, plaintiff testified that, as a result of defendant's failure to “legalize” the attic, she hired another construction company to legalize the attic and paid $5,000 for its work. Following the inquest, the Civil Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,500. Plaintiff appeals on the ground of inadequacy, arguing that the court should have awarded her the principal sum of $5,000.

In a small claims action, appellate review is limited to a determination of whether “substantial justice has ․ been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law” (CCA 1807; see CCA 1804; Ross v. Friedman, 269 AD2d 584, 584 [2000]; Williams v. Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]). Upon our review of the record, we find that plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that “substantial justice” requires an increase in the amount awarded (see CCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., SIEGAL and TOUSSAINT, JJ., concur.