Opinion
No. 2011–1211 N C.
2012-08-6
Samuel MILLER, Respondent, v. Peter DILIBERTO and White Glove Touch, Appellants.
Present: NICOLAI, P.J., MOLIA and IANNACCI, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (Eugene H. Shifrin, Ct. Atty. Ref.), entered December 8, 2010. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,750.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover the sum of $4,940 for breach of a 10–year warranty, alleging that defendants had failed to repair damage to plaintiff's roof, which they had replaced. After a nonjury trial, the District Court awarded plaintiff judgment in the principal sum of $2,750. Defendants appeal. Upon a review of the record, we find that the judgment provided the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1804, 1807; see Ross v. Friedman, 269 A.D.2d 584 [2000];Williams v. Roper, 269 A.D.2d 125, 126 [2000] ).
The decision of a factfinder should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that his conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Claridge Gardens v. Menotti, 160 A.D.2d 544 [1990] ). Furthermore, the determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as his opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords him 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 standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court ( see Williams, 269 A.D.2d at 126). As we find that the record supports the factfinder's determination, the judgment is affirmed.