In Ehue v. Green , a tenant allegedly left a two-family Brooklyn home owing her landlord $9,3312,32 -- $7,500 in rent, $784 in damages, $600 for failing to return a refrigerator and stove, and some $428.32 in legal fees and costs.
When the matter was heard by a judge, the owner, Victor Ehue, was only awarded $1,276.29.
Why the disparity? Well, the Kings County Civil Court found a few problems with Victor's case.
First, the tenant testified that the keys had been surrendered to Victor's wife on September 30, 2004, and that the rent sought (through January 2005) exceeded what was actually due.
For some reason, although Victor's wife was in the courthouse and had been designated a witness, she was never called to testify as to whether or not the keys had been received (and the unit vacated).
The Civil Court applied a "negative inference" to Victor's failure to have his wife testify and thus found in the tenant's favor as to her departure date (and only awarded the owner monies due through September 30, 2004, after offsetting security proceeds held by the landlord).
As to the damages, it also worked to his detriment that Victor produced "mostly incomprehensible" receipts for his expenditures. (Apparently, most of the documents Victor supplied were "not sufficiently itemized to support his claim.")
Nor did the court ultimately conclude that the refrigerator or stove had been removed from the premises. Apparently, the Civil Court credited the tenant's testimony that the appliances had been left at the property and remained within the owner's control.
On appeal, the Appellate Term, 2nd and 11th Judicial Districts, saw the hue as all Green and affirmed the trial court's decision in all respects.
To view a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Ehue v. Green