Michael Baum, appellant pro se. Geist, Schwartz & Jellinek, PLLC (Russ F. Jellinek of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Village of Port Chester, Westchester County (Matthew J. Troy, III, J.), entered August 22, 2019. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover the principal sum of $878 from defendant Village Green Homeowners Association, claiming that defendant is obligated to pay for a portion of the cost of repairs that plaintiff had his contractor perform to the wood siding of his house.

At a nonjury trial, it was established that, following a February 2018 membership meeting, defendant's bylaws had been amended to make defendant responsible for the maintenance of the wood siding on houses under its governance and to permit defendant to make assessments in connection with such maintenance. Defendant then negotiated a contract, pursuant to which American Home, Inc. (American) would perform repairs to the siding of each of the 28 houses under defendant's governance at a discounted price. Plaintiff was provided with a proposal pursuant to which "the contractor" would perform work on plaintiff's house for a price of $3,510, in consideration for which plaintiff would pay $2,632.50 (75% of that price) to defendant. The remainder of the contract price was to be paid to American by defendant. However, shortly after American began work on other houses under defendant's governance, plaintiff became aware that American was not fully insured; plaintiff also expressed concerns about the quality of American's work. Plaintiff hired his own contractor to work on his house, paid his contractor's bill, and demanded that defendant reimburse him $878, which was approximately the amount of American's proposed bill that defendant would have paid American on plaintiff's behalf. Following the trial, the Justice Court dismissed the action.

In a small claims action, our review is limited to a determination of whether "substantial [*2]justice has . . . been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law" (UJCA 1807; see UJCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). Since, in this matter, defendant had obligated itself to pay a portion of bills for repairs performed only by American, and plaintiff failed to establish that defendant had an obligation to reimburse any portion of the sum plaintiff had paid to a different contractor, we find that the dismissal of his claim rendered substantial justice between the parties (see UJCA 1804, 1807).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

EMERSON, J.P., GARGUILO and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.