Opinion
2009-647 OR C.
Decided August 2, 2010.
Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Newburgh, Orange County (Peter M. Kulkin, J.), entered January 18, 2007. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $1,500 and dismissed defendants' counterclaim.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed without costs.
PRESENT: NICOLAI, P.J., LaCAVA and IANNACCI, JJ.
Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover a security deposit in the amount of $1,500. Defendants counterclaimed to recover the sum of $4,265 for damage to the apartment. After a nonjury trial, the City Court found that plaintiff was entitled to the return of her security deposit and that defendants had failed to establish any damage to the premises.
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 ( see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544). This standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court ( see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126). The determination of the trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as the trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility ( see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511).
As the court's findings and conclusions are supported by the reconstructed record, we find that the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (UCCA 1804, 1807; Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584; Williams, 269 AD2d at 126), and the judgment is affirmed.
LaCava and Iannacci, JJ., concur.
Nicolai, P.J., taking no part.