The plaintiff moves to amend the amount of the judgment entered in this court on April 22, 2013. The Defendant has filed no papers in opposition to the motion.

In support of this motion, plaintiff's counsel, E. Hope Green, argues that the defendant defaulted on a consumer credit transaction with plaintiff's assignor, Aaron, Inc. Subsequently, on April 22, 2013, a default judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of $1,995.51. Counsel now argues, upon review of the entered judgment, that the judgment amount only reflects the amount sought on the First Cause of Action of the compliant of $1,707.77, plus interest of $62.74, and costs of $225.00. Counsel states that she mistakenly only submitted judgment on the First Cause of Action and omitted the amount claimed on the Third Cause of Action, $2,758.94. Accordingly plaintiff argues that the correct judgment amount is $5,088.21, representing the amount on the First Cause of Action of $1,707.77, plus $2,758.94 on the Third Cause of Action, plus interest of $396.50, plus costs of $225.00.

Under CPLR 5019, a trial court may cure a mistake, defect or irregularity in a judgment or order provided no substantial right of a party is affected by said cure (CPLR 5019 (a)). While the trial court may correct clerical errors, a mistake in the entry of the judgment or the omission of a right or relief to which a party is entitled through an [*2]amendment, "cannot, by amendment, change the judgment in matter of substance . . . or limit the legal effect of it to meet some supposed equity subsequently called to its attention or subsequently arising. Those errors are, under our system of procedure, to be corrected either by vacating the judgment or by an appeal" (First National City Bank v Elsky, 62 Misc 2d 880 (Civ. Ct. New York Co. 1970)).

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that plaintiff's application for an increase in a money judgment due to a clerical error by plaintiff's counsel is a "mistake, defect or irregularity" capable of cure by amendment under CPLR 5019. Here there is no change to the substance of plaintiff's claim as defendant was on notice of the amount claimed in the Third Cause of Action when plaintiff filed the summons and complaint. Finding that defendant had notice of the amount claimed, plaintiff's motion to amend the judgment amount is granted.

Motion granted.

This constitutes the Decision and Order of this Court.

The Court considered the following papers on this motion: Notice of Motion dated November 22, 2013; Affirmation in support, Exh. A-C.

AS/akb

Dated:March 5, 2014

Mount Vernon, New York

_________________________________

HON. ADAM SEIDEN

Associate City Judge of Mount Vernon