Hynard v Cuttino (2013 NY Slip Op 51103(U))

Hynard v Cuttino

2013 NY Slip Op 51103(U) [40 Misc 3d 128(A)]

Decided on June 28, 2013

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

Paul O. Hynard, Appellant, —

against

La'Davis J. Cuttino, Respondent.

Appeal, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, Westchester County (Robert C. Cerrato, J.), entered June 22, 2012. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $7,836.78.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the City Court for a new trial.

Plaintiff commenced this action against defendant, plaintiff's former tenant, to recover the sum of $14,448, representing rent and late fees from October 2010 through April 2011, rent for a period beyond the term of the lease, from May 2011 through August 2011, costs incurred in repairing and cleaning the premises, and marshal fees and court costs.

The evidence adduced at a nonjury trial showed that the parties had entered into a one-year lease, which commenced on May 1, 2010 and ended on April 30, 2011; that the monthly rent was $965; and that defendant had paid a security deposit of $965. The lease, and plaintiff's paid invoices for cleaning and repairs performed after defendant had vacated the premises, were admitted into evidence. Defendant testified that she had moved out of the premises on December 13, 2010, because plaintiff would not make any repairs even though she had notified him about [*2]conditions in the apartment. Defendant also asserted that plaintiff had not returned her security deposit. Defendant admitted that she had not paid rent for November 2010 through April 2011. The City Court rejected plaintiff's claim for rent for the months after the expiration of the lease and awarded judgment to plaintiff in the principal sum of $7,836.78. Plaintiff appeals on the ground of inadequacy.

CPLR 4213 (b) directs that the decision of a trial court must set forth "the facts it deems essential" (see Kirschner v Viala, 38 Misc 3d 131[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 52413[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2012]; see e.g. Weckstein v Breitbart, 111 AD2d 6 [1985]; Manu v Gerard Ct. Assoc., LLC, 37 Misc 3d 132[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 52007[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2012]). Here, the City Court failed to make any specific findings of fact with regard to the claims asserted by plaintiff, and, as a result, it cannot be determined how the court arrived at its award of $7,836.78. Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the matter is remitted to the City Court for a new trial.