Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, Sixth District (Gigi A. Spelman, J.), entered May 1, 2007. The judgment, insofar as appealed from, after a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiff's cause of action.

Judgment, insofar as appealed from, reversed without costs and judgment directed to be entered in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $775.

In this small claims action, plaintiff sought to recover the $775 security deposit he paid defendant, his landlord, as well as the cost of a refrigerator that he purchased for the apartment. At trial, plaintiff established that he was directed to leave the premises and he returned the keys to defendant.

Insofar as plaintiff seeks to recover the value of the property which he was allegedly not permitted to remove from the premises, a review of the record reveals that plaintiff failed to establish the reasonable value of said property. With respect to the $775 security deposit, we note that a security deposit remains the property of the tenant (General Obligations Law § 7-103 [1]) and must be returned at the conclusion of the tenancy absent proof that the tenant caused damage beyond that attributable to ordinary wear and tear (e.g. Finnerty v Freeman, 176 Misc 2d 220, 222 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 1998]). Defendant failed to establish that the alleged damage to the premises was caused by plaintiff. In any event, she failed to provide any evidence establishing the extent of the costs incurred to repair the alleged damage, and she was not entitled to the cost of a new stove. Accordingly, substantial justice (see UDCA 1804, 1807) requires that the judgment, insofar as appealed from, dismissing plaintiff's cause of action be reversed and judgment entered in favor of plaintiff in the principal sum of $775.

McCabe, J.P., Tanenbaum and Molia, JJ., concur. [*2]
Decision Date: September 29, 2008