Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Fourth District (Douglas Lerose, J.), entered January 17, 2013. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,500.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this commercial claims action to recover the sum of $3,971, alleging that defendants had failed to tender complete payment in accordance with a contract between the parties. Defendants appeal from a judgment of the District Court, which, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,500. Upon a review of the record, we find that substantial justice has been done between the parties according to the rules and principles of substantive law (see UDCA 1804-A, 1807-A).

The decision of a fact-finding court should not be disturbed upon appeal unless it is obvious that its conclusions could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). 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 [1991] ). The deference accorded to a trial court's credibility determinations applies with even greater force to judgments rendered in the Commercial Claims Part of the court (see Williams v Roper, 269 AD2d 125 [2000]). As the record supports the trial court's determination, we find no reason to disturb the judgment.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Marano, J.P., Tolbert and Garguilo, JJ., concur.