Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2026

Almonte v. Castillo

Almonte v. Castillo
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 15, 2026
2026 NY Slip Op 50926(U)
Almonte v. Castillo

Opinion

Almonte v Castillo - 2026 NY Slip Op 50926(U)
skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

Almonte v Castillo

2026 NY Slip Op 50926(U)

June 15, 2026

Appellate Term, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Digest-Index Classification: Courts—Small Claims-Recovery of Duplicate Money Transfer Retained by Defendant

Bernabela Almonte d/b/a Elegant Driving School Inc., Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Wilson R. Reyes Castillo d/b/a RFS Cargo Express, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Decided on June 15, 2026

570457/26

Present: Tisch, J.P., Perez, Alpert, JJ.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Eliezer Rodriguez, J.), entered July 9, 2025, after trial, in favor of plaintiff and awarding her damages in the principal sum of $2,560.00.

[*1]

Per Curiam.

Judgment (Eliezer Rodriguez, J.), entered July 9, 2025, modified, by reducing the amount of plaintiff's recovery to the principal sum of $2,501.00; as modified, judgment affirmed, without costs.

Except as indicated, the trial court achieved "substantial justice" consistent with substantive law principles (see CCA §§ 1804, 1807; see also Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000], lv dismissed 95 NY2d 898 [2000]), in awarding judgment to plaintiff. A fair interpretation of the evidence supports a finding that defendant was the beneficiary of a duplicate money transfer, for which he failed to reimburse plaintiff. However, the record and the ends of substantial justice support a recovery of damages in the principal sum of $2,501, the correct amount of the duplicate money transfer retained by defendant.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur

Decision Date: June 15, 2026

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

Opinion

Almonte v Castillo - 2026 NY Slip Op 50926(U)
skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

Almonte v Castillo

2026 NY Slip Op 50926(U)

June 15, 2026

Appellate Term, First Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Digest-Index Classification: Courts—Small Claims-Recovery of Duplicate Money Transfer Retained by Defendant

Bernabela Almonte d/b/a Elegant Driving School Inc., Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Wilson R. Reyes Castillo d/b/a RFS Cargo Express, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Decided on June 15, 2026

570457/26

Present: Tisch, J.P., Perez, Alpert, JJ.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Eliezer Rodriguez, J.), entered July 9, 2025, after trial, in favor of plaintiff and awarding her damages in the principal sum of $2,560.00.

[*1]

Per Curiam.

Judgment (Eliezer Rodriguez, J.), entered July 9, 2025, modified, by reducing the amount of plaintiff's recovery to the principal sum of $2,501.00; as modified, judgment affirmed, without costs.

Except as indicated, the trial court achieved "substantial justice" consistent with substantive law principles (see CCA §§ 1804, 1807; see also Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000], lv dismissed 95 NY2d 898 [2000]), in awarding judgment to plaintiff. A fair interpretation of the evidence supports a finding that defendant was the beneficiary of a duplicate money transfer, for which he failed to reimburse plaintiff. However, the record and the ends of substantial justice support a recovery of damages in the principal sum of $2,501, the correct amount of the duplicate money transfer retained by defendant.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur

Decision Date: June 15, 2026

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.