Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Peter Paul Sweeney, J.), entered May 27, 2010. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,305.44.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this commercial claims action to recover for payment due on merchandise it had delivered to defendant. After a nonjury trial, the Civil Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,305.44. 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 (CCA 1804-A, 1807-A; 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 Commercial Claims Part of the court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d at 126). Furthermore, the determination of a 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 reason to disturb the judgment.

Pesce, P.J., Weston and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: October 26, 2011