Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Town of Mount Hope, Orange County (Joseph Hosking, J.), entered September 18, 2008. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $400.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed without costs.

After a nonjury trial in this small claims action to recover a $500 deposit which plaintiff had paid to defendant for motocross instructions, the Justice Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $400.

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 (UJCA 1807; 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 of the evidence (see e.g. 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 (see Williams, 269 AD2d at 126). Furthermore, the determination of the trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as the trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses (see e.g. Vizzari v State of New York, 184 [*2]AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). The record supports the trial court's implicit conclusion that defendant breached the contract.

Accordingly the judgment is affirmed.

Nicolai, P.J., LaCava and Iannacci, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: May 21, 2010