Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, Westchester County (Arthur J. Doran, III, J.), entered May 26, 2006. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

Judgment affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action for breach of contract, plaintiff testified that he gave defendant a check in the sum of $1,000 which contained a notation on its face that it was for a "loan." This notation, however, did not unequivocally establish that a promise was made by defendant (see Skiadas v Terovolas, 219 AD2d 635, 636 [1995]; see also Farca v Farca, 216 AD2d 520 [1995]). Furthermore, defendant offered testimony which countered plaintiff's claim, and plaintiff did not rebut defendant's evidence. The
court below found defendant's testimony to be credible and dismissed the complaint against her.

The determination of issues of credibility is 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 [*2]Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]).

Rudolph, P.J., Lippman and Owen, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: May 3, 2007