George A. Balalaos, Respondent, v. Joan Bernstein, Appellant. (2026)

ORDERED that the judgment, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the District Court for the entry of a judgment dismissing the action.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover the principal sum of $4,500 for breach of contract after defendant failed to pay for renovations plaintiff made to defendant's bathroom. Defendant filed a counterclaim to recover the principal sum of $5,000, claiming that plaintiff had rendered his services in a defective manner. At a nonjury trial, plaintiff admitted that he was not a licensed home improvement contractor, but stated he had subcontracted at least part of the work to a licensed party. The District Court (James A. Saladino, J.) denied defendant's oral motion which sought to dismiss the action on the ground that plaintiff was not licensed. Following the trial, a judgment was entered on July 7, 2025 awarding plaintiff the principal sum of $4,500 and dismissing the counterclaim. As limited by her brief, defendant appeals from so much of the judgment as awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $4,500.

In a small claims action, this court's 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" (UDCA 1807; see UDCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]).

Where, as here, a contractor seeks to recover for work done on a homeowner's bathroom in Nassau County, the contractor is required to be a licensed home improvement contractor (see CPLR 3015 [e]; Nassau County Administrative Code §§ 21-11.1 [3]; 21-11.2; ENKO Constr. Corp. v Aronshtein, 89 AD3d 676 [2011]; Clean & Clear Pool Corp. v Overlander, 46 Misc 3d 137[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 50065[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2015]). Here, plaintiff conceded, in opposition to defendant's oral motion at trial, that he did not possess the requisite license. Consequently, defendant's motion to dismiss should have been granted (see Cooper v White, 64 Misc 3d 127[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 50982[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2019]). Plaintiff's contention that he is entitled to recover because he performed the work with his son, a duly licensed subcontractor, and with the assistance of a licensed plumber, is without merit, as such relationships are insufficient to permit an unlicensed contractor to recover for work performed (see Nationwide HVAC Supply Corp. v Mosby, 244 AD3d 737 [2025]).

In view of the foregoing, the award in favor of plaintiff failed to render substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (see UDCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the District Court for the entry of a judgment dismissing the action.

DRISCOLL, P.J., WALSH and VAZQUEZ-DOLES, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Jennifer Chan

Chief Clerk

Decision Date: September 17, 2026