Case Name: Princess Simmons, Respondent, v. Apple Bank for Savings, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1997-01-23
Citations: 172 Misc. 2d 373
Docket Number: 
Parties: Princess Simmons, Respondent, v Apple Bank for Savings, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 172
Pages: 373–374

Head Matter:
[660 NYS2d 603]
Princess Simmons, Respondent, v Apple Bank for Savings, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
January 23, 1997
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Timothy P. Brennan, New York City, for appellant.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
Appeal dismissed.
The denial of a motion to dismiss a small claims action does not constitute the denial of substantial justice within the meaning of UDCA 1807 since the only effect of same is to require the parties to proceed to trial (McBrearty v Pryor & Mandelup, NYLJ, Apr. 23, 1992, at 28, col 1 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]; Chaloupka v Nassau Travel Ctr., NYLJ, Feb. 1, 1980, at 13, col 5 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed.
DiPaola, P. J., Stark and Ingrassia, JJ., concur.