| Ramchandani v Piran Fashions, Inc. |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 51234(U) [44 Misc 3d 136(A)] |
| Decided on July 28, 2014 |
| Appellate Term, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Appeal from a decision of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Joseph E. Capella, J.), dated June 6, 2012, deemed from an amended final judgment of the same court (Terrence C. O'Connor, J.) entered June 6, 2012 (see CPLR 5512 [a]). The amended final judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded landlords possession and the principal sum of $45,680, and dismissed the counterclaims, in a nonpayment summary proceeding.
ORDERED that the amended final judgment is affirmed, without costs.
In this commercial nonpayment proceeding, the Civil Court, following a nonjury trial, awarded landlords possession and the principal sum of $45,680.
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]). Furthermore, the determination of a trier of fact as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 [1992]; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 [1991]). Upon a review of the record, we find that there is ample support for the Civil Court's credibility determinations.
Tenant's contention on appeal, that the Civil Court erred in not admitting into evidence copies of certain rent checks, is without merit, as the copies were not properly authenticated (see CPLR 4539 [b]). Tenant's contention that the Civil Court's failure to admit into evidence tenant's copy of a notarized receipt for two fur coats, bearing a handwritten rent-reduction agreement, requires reversal, also lacks merit, as landlord Mohan N. Ramchandani denied that the rent-reduction was on the receipt when he signed it, and he showed the court a copy of the same notarized receipt which lacked the purported rent-reduction agreement. Finally, contrary to tenant's further contention, tenant failed to introduce proper proof of damages in support of its counterclaims.
Accordingly, the amended final judgment is affirmed.
Weston, J.P., Aliotta and Elliot, JJ., concur.