Apuzzo v Central Cabinets, LLC

Holding The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion to set aside the decision and for a new inquest because the plaintiff failed to establish his entitlement to damages. The trial court providently exercised its discretion in precluding the plaintiff’s witness from testifying regarding the value of the cabinets because the witness lacked the requisite experience to render such an opinion.

The court’s words

At an inquest, the plaintiff bears the burden of setting forth a prima facie case as to damages

2026 NY Slip Op 06082, at the official text

The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted

2026 NY Slip Op 06082, at the official text

As a general rule the admissibility of expert testimony on a particular point is addressed to the discretion of the trial court

2026 NY Slip Op 06082, at the official text

An expert should be possessed of the requisite skill, training, education, knowledge or experience from which it can be assumed that the information imparted or the opinion rendered is reliable

2026 NY Slip Op 06082, at the official text

Here, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that his witness possessed the requisite experience to render an opinion regarding the value of the cabinets delivered by the defendant

2026 NY Slip Op 06082, at the official text