Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Peter Paul Sweeney, J.), entered October 17, 2005. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $4,316.50.

Judgment reversed without costs and complaint dismissed.

Pursuant to an agreement between the parties herein, plaintiff, who could not obtain his own insurance to drive a livery cab due to his bad driving history, transferred title of his automobile to the defendant corporation so that he could work as a livery cab driver insured under the corporation's insurance. Plaintiff's insurance broker, fully aware of the circumstances, introduced plaintiff to the defendants, who owned several livery cars. Before he began working for defendants, plaintiff paid defendants five and one half months of insurance premiums in the sum of $4,300. Plaintiff also was required to pay a $100 per month rental fee. Plaintiff claims he gifted the vehicle to the corporation, whereas defendants contend the vehicle was purchased for $6,000. Nevertheless, the bill of sale submitted to the Department of Motor Vehicles indicated that the vehicle was sold for $600, thus plaintiff merely paid $49.50 in sales tax.

The evidence adduced at trial established that 10 days after plaintiff began driving said vehicle, he was in an automobile accident. The vehicle was deemed a total loss. The defendants received a check from the insurance company for the sum of $8,248. The defendants paid the [*2]plaintiff the sum of $4,000.

Thereafter, plaintiff commenced the instant action seeking, among other things, to recover a portion of the insurance premiums he paid to defendants. The court below found that defendants were unjustly enriched and awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $4,316.50. The instant appeal by defendants ensued.

In our view, plaintiff had unclean hands with respect to his claim to recover the insurance premiums paid to defendants, since he could not individually obtain insurance on his own.
"It is the settled law of this State (and probably of every other State) that a party to an illegal contract cannot ask a court of law to help him carry out his illegal object . . . For no court should be required to serve as paymaster of the wages of crime, or referee between thieves. Therefore, the law will not extend its aid to either of the parties' or listen to their complaints against each other, but will leave them where their own acts have placed them'" (Ford v Henry, 155 Misc 2d 192, 193-194 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 1993], quoting Stone v Freeman, 298 NY 268, 271 [1948], citing Schermerhorn v Talman, 14 NY 93, 141 [1856]).

Thus, plaintiff cannot invoke the power of this court to recover the money he lost (see R.A.C. Group, Inc. v Board of Educ. of City of N. Y., 21 AD3d 243 [2005]). Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and dismiss the complaint.

Weston Patterson, J.P., Golia and Belen, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: January 14, 2008