Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Noach Dear, J.), entered October 1, 2012. The judgment, insofar as appealed from, entered pursuant to a decision of the same court dated January 19, 2012, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $12,925 as against defendant Juan Reyes.

ORDERED that, on the court's own motion, the notice of appeal from the decision dated January 19, 2012 is deemed a premature notice of appeal from so much of the judgment entered October 1, 2012 as is against defendant Juan Reyes (see CPLR 5520 [c]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the judgment, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, without costs, and the complaint, insofar as asserted against defendant Juan Reyes, is dismissed without prejudice.

When she was in middle school, plaintiff lost her mother in the World Trade Center attack on September 11, 2001. She and her sister began to live with their ailing grandmother. When that living situation became unworkable, plaintiff was invited by the Reyes/Nunez family, who lived in the same building as plaintiff's grandmother, to live with them. Plaintiff lived with the Reyes/Nunez family for several years. When plaintiff reached the age of 18, she was awarded substantial compensation by the federal September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001. Apparently, upon receipt of this compensation, plaintiff purchased various items for the family and, in April 2008, plaintiff transferred money to the bank account of a member of the Reyes/Nunez family for the purchase of a car in the sum of $12,925. The car was registered to, and title was issued in the name of, defendant Emmanuel Nunez.

Plaintiff subsequently commenced this action against defendants Emmanuel Nunez and Juan Reyes to recover the sum of $12,925, representing the purchase price of the car. At a nonjury trial, plaintiff testified that she had purchased the car because defendants' car was "messed up" and because they had promised to teach her to drive. She claimed that she no longer had any money and was now on welfare. The defense witnesses testified that plaintiff had been like a member of their family and that she had purchased the car as a gift to them. Following the [*2]trial, the Civil Court, in a decision dated January 19, 2012, found that the Reyes/Nunez family had taken advantage of plaintiff and had influenced her in making her purchasing decisions. The court stated that such circumstances supported the imposition of a constructive trust and awarded plaintiff the sum of $12,925. Defendant Juan Reyes appeals from the decision. A judgment was subsequently entered against both defendants. We deem the notice of appeal by defendant Juan Reyes to be a premature notice of appeal from so much of the judgment as was entered against him (see CPLR 5520 [c]).

The Civil Court of the City of New York is a court of limited jurisdiction (see CCA 202) and possesses no equity jurisdiction except as specifically conferred upon it by statute (see NY Const, art VI, § 15). "Generally, the determinant as to whether a claim is at law or at equity is the nature of the relief which, under the facts alleged, could fairly compensate the party bringing the claim . . . . If money damages alone could achieve that end, the action is generally at law" (Hudson View II Assoc. v Gooden, 222 AD2d 163, 168 [1996]). In the instant case, since plaintiff is seeking monetary damages, her action sounds in law and not in equity. However, to the extent that plaintiff is seeking a legal remedy, the record before this court does not support any legal cause of action. The imposition of a constructive trust, on the other hand, is a form of equitable relief (see Simonds v Simonds, 45 NY2d 233, 241 [1978] Rowe v Kingston, 94 AD3d 852 [2012]), and there is no statute conferring upon the Civil Court of the City of New York subject matter jurisdiction to grant such affirmative equitable relief. Consequently, the Civil Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to impose a constructive trust in the instant case.

Accordingly, the judgment, insofar as appealed from, is reversed and the complaint, insofar as asserted against defendant Juan Reyes, is dismissed without prejudice to any equitable claims which plaintiff may wish to assert in an appropriate forum.

Pesce, P.J., Weston and Solomon, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: February 28, 2014