When Gittelman & Co. sued to recover payment of its accounting related charges, its client, Penta Restoration, claimed to have notified Gittelman of objections to the invoicing and to have terminated the relationship.
After the New York County Civil Court granted Gittelman a judgment for $25,425.43, Penta appealed, and because there was no factual support for the defenses presented -- such as the date and time any oral objections were made, and the substance of those conversations -- the Appellate Term, First Department, left the outcome undisturbed.
(It didn't help Penta's position that it continued to use Gittelman's services and entered into a new agreement after any purported termination.)
How would you account for that?
To view a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use the following link: Gittelman & Co., P.C. v. Penta Restoration Corp.