Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Newburgh, Orange County (B. Harold Ramsey, J.), entered July 28, 2005. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiff's claim and awarded defendants the principal sum of $1,500 on their counterclaim.

Judgment affirmed without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this small claims action to recover the balance due for restoration and repairs he allegedly performed on defendants' home. Defendants counterclaimed for damages sustained due to the poor quality of the work.

The testimony of defendants' witness established that the work performed by plaintiff, including the installation of a header and the laying of the subfloor in the kitchen, was not done in a professional and workmanlike manner. In addition, the
witness testified that some of the work that plaintiff claimed to have done was not performed. The court found such testimony to be credible.

The determination of issues of credibility are for the trier of fact as it had the opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses (see McGuirk v Mugs Pub, 250 AD2d 824 [1998]; Richard's Home Ctr. & Lbr. v Kraft, 199 AD2d 254 [1993]; Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). Its decision should not be disturbed on appeal unless it is obvious that it could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544, supra). The deference accorded to a trial court's credibility determinations applies with even greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court given the limited standard of review (see UCCA 1807; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). In view of the foregoing, the judgment dismissing plaintiff's action and awarding defendants the sum of $1,500 on their counterclaim should be affirmed as substantial justice was done between the parties according to the rules and principles of [*2]substantive law (see UCCA 1807).

Rudolph, P.J., Lippman and Molia, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 5, 2007