Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Newburgh, Orange County (Peter M. Kulkin, J.), entered May 3, 2007. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed without costs.

In this small claims action, plaintiff seeks to recover for the allegedly defective replacement of his automobile engine. After a nonjury trial, the City Court found in favor of defendant dismissing the action. 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 (UCCA 1804, 1807; see Ross v Friedman, 269 AD2d 584 [2000]; Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125, 126 [2000]).

The decision of a 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 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 v Roper, 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 assess the credibility of the witnesses (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). As the record supports the trial court's determination, we find no basis to disturb the judgment.

Nicolai, P.J., LaCava and Iannacci, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: November 19, 2010