Appeal from a judgment of the District Court, Nassau County, First District (Vito M. DeStefano, J.), entered April 23, 2004. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

Judgment affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff sought to recover for damage to her car resulting from a car accident which plaintiff claimed was caused by defendant's failure to properly fix her car's brakes. Plaintiff alleged that she was unable to stop in time at a red light and rear-ended the car in front of her. Upon a review of the record, we find that the trial court properly rendered its judgment providing the parties with substantial justice according to the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1804, 1807; see Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]). The decision of the 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 [*2]
of the evidence (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). This standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in small claims court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126). Furthermore, the determination of the trier of fact as to issues of credibility are given substantial deference as it had the opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses thereby affording it a better perspective from which to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses (McGuirk v Mugs Pub, 250 AD2d 824 [1998]; Richard's Home Ctr. & Lbr. v Kraft, 199 AD2d 254 [1993]; Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]).

Rudolph, P.J., Angiolillo and McCabe, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: February 03, 2006