Legal Opinion

Mormon v. Acura of Valley Stream

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided December 6, 2001PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

*698Plaintiffs action, instituted in the Small Claims Part of the District Court, which seeks to recover money damages, in essence also seeks reformation of a contract based on mistake and/or fraud (see generally, Chimart Assoc. v Paul, 66 NY2d 570, 574). The jurisdiction of the Small Claims Part of the District Court is limited to “any cause of action for money only not in excess of three thousand dollars” (UDCA 1801 [emphasis added]). The small claims court, therefore, was without jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by plaintiff, which is equitable in nature…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Chimart Associates v. PaulNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Menkis v. Whitestone Savings & Loan Ass'nNassau County District Court · 1974
  3. Petrides v. Park Hill Restaurant, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1943

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Polar Bear Mech., Inc. v. Walison Corp.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2017
  2. Unneland v. Greenwood CondominiumAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2018
  3. Weinberg v. PickerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API