Consolidated appeal from judgments of the Justice Court of the Town of Harrison, Westchester County (John M. Voetsch, J.), entered on April 27, 2005 and July 18, 2005. The judgments dismissed two small claims actions.

Judgments affirmed with statutory costs of $25.

The instant two small claims actions involve plaintiff Glendora's entitlement to access to public-access cable channels to air self-produced programming, and matters appurtenant thereto. Plaintiff alleged that the "defendants are sued for requiring that Glendora have a local resident signer as a condition for cablecasting her show, A Chat
With Glendora. Such a condition has no statutory authority." She further alleged that the defendants "have no authority to censor A Chat With Glendora and refuse to cablecast same without notice to Glendora." Glendora also alleged that defendant Patricia Langelotti had reneged upon an oral agreement to serve as local sponsor for the show. Plaintiff sought $3,000 "for the money, labor, time and stress defendants have cost her in limiting and prohibiting her rights to public access TV." [*2]

Defendant Cablevision moved to dismiss. The court held a hearing at which attorneys for Cablevision and defendant Langelotti, as well as Langelotti herself and plaintiff, appeared and argued the merits of their respective positions. Thereafter, the court entered judgments dismissing both actions. Plaintiff appealed. The two appeals have been consolidated.

The court below properly dismissed the actions.

Plaintiff's actions are palpably without merit as to any of the defendants herein. She has failed to proffer any cause of action pursuant to Public Service Law § 229 or Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 § 531 (b) (mandating the promulgation of local rules and procedures) or § 531 (e) (prohibiting operator censorship), as she did not allege that any defendant exercised editorial control over the content of her show or refused to air it upon compliance with sponsorship requirements (see Glendora v Marshall, 947 F Supp 707 [SDNY 1996], affd 129 F2d 123 [2d Cir 1997]). Glendora only argues that the requirement of local sponsorship is illegal, a proposition that has already been rejected by the federal courts (see e.g. Goldberg v Cablevision Sys. Corp., 281 F Supp 2d 595, 603 [EDNY 2003]), and which this court likewise rejects. Moreover, there is no subject matter jurisdiction of the small claims court over Glendora's claims pursuant to the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as that Act does not provide for money damages in lawsuits concerning the right to public access (see 47 USC § 555a), the sole remedy available in small claims court (see UJCA 1801).

As to the action against defendant Langelotti for breach of an alleged oral contract to sponsor Glendora's show, plaintiff has failed to set forth any basis to support the existence of such a cause of action (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]). It has merely been asserted that Langelotti said that she would sign sponsorship papers and that Langelotti later refused to do so. This act is commonly known, as the court below noted, as changing one's mind. Every change of mind is not a breach of contract; there is no claim of any consideration for such a promise and no allegation of any terms of the alleged agreement.

In view of the foregoing, substantial justice has been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law and the judgments dismissing the actions are affirmed.

Plaintiff's prosecution of this completely meritless matter represents a clear abuse of the small claims system for purposes of oppression or harassment. Although the court below did not address Cablevision's application for an order barring plaintiff from further use of the court below to prosecute small claims actions without the court's permission, and Cablevision did not cross-appeal from that portion of the order, we draw the attention of the court below to this provision and urge that it be considered upon any future filings.

Rudolph, P.J., Angiolillo and Tanenbaum, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: November 27, 2006