Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Margaret A. Pui Yee Chan, J.), entered June 27, 2007. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

Judgment affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover $5,000 for property damage to the premises he leased to defendant. After trial, the court dismissed plaintiff's action.

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 (CCA 1804, 1807; see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]). The decision of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed on appeal
unless it is obvious that the court's conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). This standard applies with greater force to judgments rendered in the Small Claims Part of the court (Williams, 269 AD2d at 126). Furthermore, the determination of the trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference as the court has the opportunity to observe the witnesses and evaluate their testimony and demeanor, thereby affording the trial court a better perspective from which to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). We find no reason to [*2]disturb the judgment dismissing the action.

Golia, J.P., Rios and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: October 30, 2008