What is "substantial Justice" - looking for a definition

[PamL]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?I live in NY. Won a small claims case. Defendant appealing. Can someone give me the definition of the traditional notions of fair play and "substantial justice" ... or tell me where I can find a definition for it. Apparently when a judge reviews an appeal from small claims in NY he does not review the facts only if there was "substantial justice" - need to know to formulate my argument
Please advise. My arguement to his appeal is due by May 2
Thank youundefined

 

[JETX]

Can someone give me the definition of the traditional notions of fair play and "substantial justice" ... or tell me where I can find a definition for it.

sub·stan·tial (sb-stnshl)
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or having substance; material.
2. True or real; not imaginary.
3. Solidly built; strong.
4. Ample; sustaining: a substantial breakfast.
5. Considerable in importance, value, degree, amount, or extent: won by a substantial margin.
6. Possessing wealth or property; well-to-do.

jus·tice (jsts)
n.
1. The quality of being just; fairness.
2. a. The principle of moral rightness; equity.
b. Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness.
3. a. The upholding of what is just, especially fair treatment and due reward in accordance with honor, standards, or law.
b. Law. The administration and procedure of law.
4. Conformity to truth, fact, or sound reason.

fair play
n.
Conformity to established rules.

 

[BL]

this is an Example :

Appeal by plaintiff from a small claims judgment of the City Court, City of Yonkers, Westchester County (A. Doran, J.), entered on December 11, 2001, in favor of defendant dismissing the action after trial.

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff sought to recover damages in the amount of $2,510 resulting from defendant's sale to her of a defective bedroom set.

In our opinion, plaintiff failed to establish an effective and timely rejection of the bedroom set (see UCC 2-602 [1]). Moreover, even assuming that plaintiff had effectively rejected the set, plaintiffs testimony was inconsistent as to the purchase price, and there was no documentary evidence submitted which would enable the court to determine same. Without such evidence, it is impossible to determine plaintiffs damages based on rejection (see UCC 2-71 1) or on any other theory (UCC 2-7 14; see also UCCA 1804).

Our review is limited to determining whether substantial justice was done "according to the rules and principles of substantive law" (UCCA 1807). It cannot be said, based on the record herein, that dismissal of the action was so clearly erroneous as to warrant reversal.
Decision Date: December 03, 2003

________________________________________