Luis Alcala, appellant pro se. Mintzer, Sarowitz, Zeris Ledva & Meyers, LLP (Erika L. Omundson of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Edward H. King, J.), entered April 17, 2024. The order granted defendant's motion to dismiss the action.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover the principal sum of $500, based on defendant's alleged sale to him of a defective mattress. It is undisputed that plaintiff brought an earlier small claims action (the 2022 action) seeking damages based upon the same alleged sale. On July 25, 2023, plaintiff commenced the instant action. Insofar as relevant to this appeal, defendant moved to dismiss the action. Plaintiff opposed defendant's motion. In its order entered on April 17, 2024, the Civil Court (Edward H. King, J.) granted defendant's motion and dismissed the action.

In a small claims action, our review is limited to a determination of whether "substantial justice has . . . been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law" (CCA 1807; see CCA 1804; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). Upon a review of the record, we find that the dismissal of the action rendered substantial justice between the parties. We note that, while plaintiff has raised, for the first time upon appeal, the issue of possible bias on the part of the Civil Court, that claim concerns matters which are dehors the record and which we thus do not consider (see Chimarios v Duhl, 152 AD2d 508 [1989]). We likewise do not consider defendant's allegations of fact which are dehors the record.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

QUIÑONES, J.P., MUNDY and OTTLEY, JJ., concur.