NEW ROCHELLE, NY (Feb. 27, 2019) — A New Rochelle City Court arbitrator upheld a $1,337.14 judgment against Robert Rubicco of 3 Kensington Oval in a commercial claims dispute brought by Mancino Custom Tailors over a custom-made suit, after restoring the case to arbitration following Rubicco’s request to reopen a default judgment entered against him.
The case, 1931 A Palmer Ave Corp DBA Mancino Custom Tailors v. Robert Rubicco, Index No. CC-002018-18/NR, stemmed from a dishonored check claim of $1,305 filed by the Larchmont-based tailor in August 2018. According to the commercial claims application, the dispute arose after Rubicco ordered a custom suit on May 2, 2018, for $2,586, charged in full to his American Express card. The application states that “the next day” Rubicco “asked to refund half deposit because he was nervous,” and the company refunded $1,293 to his credit card. The application states Rubicco then “came in, fitted suit, paid balance by check” before stopping payment on that check.
A demand letter dated July 19, 2018, from company president Antonio Mancino sought payment of $1,293, warning that a lawsuit would follow if the amount was not paid by Aug. 10, 2018.
Rubicco did not appear for a Nov. 14, 2018, hearing, and a judgment was entered against him after an inquest. An arbitrator’s worksheet from that hearing, signed by arbitrator S. Schmidt Lonergan, found that “plaintiff produced invoice for suit ordered by defendant,” that “defendant signed credit card slip authorizing payment,” and that “defendant picked up suit and paid balance with personal check” before he “stopped payment on check but kept merchandise.” The arbitrator entered a finding for $1,305, and the court entered judgment for $1,337.14, including $32.14 in costs.
In a Jan. 24, 2019, letter faxed to Acting City Court Judge Anthony A. Carbone, Rubicco asked that the case be reopened, writing that “my bank account got levied due to a default judgement” and that he did not appear in court because “the tailor had agreed to fix the suit … and he would discontinue small claims proceedings.” Rubicco wrote that he had “been waiting for him to let me know once he got the new material in so I could be fitted and have followed up several times since October/November with no response,” and that “it would seem he was playing me from the start and had no intention of ever withdrawing.” He asked that “this case be re-opened and the judgement be lifted so that I can argue my side.”
The court scheduled a motion to restore the case to arbitration for Feb. 27, 2019. At that hearing, arbitrator Julie S. Kattan reviewed the court file from the previous inquest and again found for the plaintiff in the amount of $1,305. Judgment was re-entered the same day for a total of $1,337.14.
This article was prepared with the assistance of AI tools under the direction and editing of Robert Cox.
Have information about this story? Email robertcox@talkofthesound (preferred) or contact via WhatsApp: +353 089 972 0669.