Opinion
No. 2014–394SC.
07-07-2015
Tijuana MACK–GADSON, Appellant, v. J.S. HUNTINGTON MOTORS, LLC Doing Business as Chevrolet of Huntington, Respondent.
Opinion
Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, Third District (C. Stephen Hackeling, J.), entered August 29, 2013. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover the amount she had paid for allegedly unauthorized repairs to her vehicle. After a nonjury trial, the District Court dismissed the action.
In a small claims action, our review is limited to a determination of whether “substantial justice has ... been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law” (UDCA 1807 ; see UDCA 1804 ; Ross v. Friedman, 269 A.D.2d 584 [2000] ; Williams v. Roper, 269 A.D.2d 125 [2000] ). Furthermore, the determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a 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 A.D.2d 564 [1992] ; Kincade v. Kincade, 178 A.D.2d 510, 511 [1991] ). This deference applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court (see Williams v. Roper, 269 A.D.2d at 126 ). As the record supports the Civil Court's determination, we find that the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice (see UDCA 1804, 1807 ; Ross v. Friedman, 269 A.D.2d 584 ; Williams v. Roper, 269 A.D.2d at 126 ).
Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
IANNACCI, J.P., MARANO and GARGUILO, JJ., concur.