Opinion
2008-163 K C.
Decided December 3, 2008.
Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Delores J. Thomas, J.), entered March 31, 2006. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,849.58.
Judgment affirmed without costs.
PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., WESTON PATTERSON and GOLIA, JJ.
In this small claims action to recover for damage to plaintiff's property caused by a leak emanating from an upstairs apartment, we find that the trial court's determination properly provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (CCA 1807; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125).
As defendant correctly argues, consequential damages are not recoverable for a breach of the warranty of habitability ( see e.g. Concetto v Pedalino, 308 AD2d 470; 303 Beverly Group v Alster, 190 Misc 2d 69 [App Term, 2d 11th Jud Dists 2001]). However, in this case, the trial court also found that defendant was negligent based on its notice of prior similar leaks in plaintiff's apartment. The court's finding is supported by plaintiff's testimony and the exhibits submitted at trial.
The decision of a fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence, especially when the findings of fact rest in large measure on considerations relating to the credibility of witnesses ( Richard's Home Ctr. Lbr. v Kraft, 199 AD2d 254; Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544). This standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court ( Williams, 269 AD2d at 126). We find that the record supports the trial court's conclusions and, accordingly, find no reason to disturb the judgment.
Pesce, P.J., Weston Patterson and Golia, JJ., concur.